"The online registration system at the U.S. Copyright Office is back online after more than a week of being down, Library of Congress officials confirmed. In addition, the Braille and Audio Reading Download system, or BARD, has also come back online. The Copyright Office’s electronic registration system was reinstated on Sunday, nine days after it was taken down as part of scheduled maintenance at the Library of Congress. The BARD system, a free service of recorded books and magazines that was offline since Sept. 1, became operational Tuesday, a week after it failed."
Issues and developments related to IP, AI, and OM. My Bloomsbury book "Ethics, Information, and Technology" will be published in January 2026 and includes chapters on IP, AI, OM, and other emerging technologies (IoT, drones, robots, autonomous vehicles, VR/AR). Preorders are available via this webpage: https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/ethics-information-and-technology-9781440856662/
Wednesday, September 9, 2015
Copyright and other Library of Congress computer systems are working again; Washington Post, 9/8/15
Peggy McGlone, Washington Post; Copyright and other Library of Congress computer systems are working again:
Sunday, September 6, 2015
‘Mr. Holmes’ Lawsuit Reaches Settlement, Says Arthur Conan Doyle Estate Attorney; Variety, 9/3/15
Ted Johnson, Variety; ‘Mr. Holmes’ Lawsuit Reaches Settlement, Says Arthur Conan Doyle Estate Attorney:
"The attorney for the estate of Sherlock Holmes creator Arthur Conan Doyle said they have reached an agreement in principle with the makers of the recent Sherlock Holmes movie “Mr. Holmes,” which the estate claimed infringed on stories that still remain under copyright. In May, the Conan Doyle estate sued Miramax, Roadside Attractions and director Bill Condon over the movie, which starred Ian McKellen in the title role and opened in July. The lawsuit also named writer Mitch Cullin and Penguin Random House, publisher of Cullin’s “A Slight Trick of the Mind” — a new Holmes tale on which the movie “Mr. Holmes” is based... On Wednesday, Allison and Laura Schauer Ives, attorney for Penguin Random House and Cullin, filed a notice of dismissal for their portion of the case, without costs to any party. Allison said that the e-book version of “A Slight Trick of the Mind” now acknowledges “use of copyrighted material by kind permission of the Conan Doyle estate.” The movie depicted an aged, retired Holmes looking back on his life and getting involved in an unsolved case. The estate noted in its lawsuit that although many of Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes works are in the public domain, 10 works published between 1923 and 1927 remain under copyright. Those works develop details of Holmes’ retirement and later life."
We’re All Artists Now; New York Times, 9/4/15
Laura M. Holson, New York Times; We’re All Artists Now:
"Choosing to be more creatively focused, though, can be disturbing at first. Ms. Cameron argues in “The Artist’s Way” that it can upend the delicate balance of relationships. “Many of us find that we have squandered our own creative energies by investing disproportionately in the lives, hopes, dreams and plans of others,” she writes. Others perceive a creative life as a quit-your-job-or-nothing proposition. They “like to think they are looking at changing their whole lives in one fell swoop,” Ms. Cameron writes, adding that, in “fantasizing about pursuing our art full time, we fail to pursue it part time — or at all.” Indeed, many people aren’t interested in a wholesale career switch. Instead they are simply seeking a respite from a harried work and home life... Beyond grown-up coloring books, the possibility for creative self-exploration is everywhere — especially in our phones. It is easy now to record and edit images, audio and video on our cellphones, making the commoditization of creativity even more pronounced. “We’ve become fascinated with innovation as a culture,” said Aaron Rasmussen, a founder of MasterClass, a new online education company that features writers, actors and sports figures teaching classes about the creative process. “People used to look at a movie and say, ‘I could do better than that,’ but they had no vehicle.”"
Saturday, September 5, 2015
The Creative Apocalypse That Wasn’t; New York Times, 8/19/15
Steven Johnson, New York Times; The Creative Apocalypse That Wasn’t:
"If you believe the data, then one question remains. Why have the more pessimistic predictions not come to pass? One incontrovertible reason is that — contrary to the justifiable fears of a decade ago — people will still pay for creative works. The Napsterization of culture turned out to be less of a threat to prices than it initially appeared. Consumers spend less for recorded music, but more for live. Most American households pay for television content, a revenue stream that for all practical purposes didn’t exist 40 years ago. Average movie-ticket prices continue to rise. For interesting reasons, book piracy hasn’t taken off the way it did with music. And a whole new creative industry — video games — has arisen to become as lucrative as Hollywood. American households in 2013 spent 4.9 percent of their income on entertainment, the exact same percentage they spent in 2000. At the same time, there are now more ways to buy creative work, thanks to the proliferation of content-delivery platforms. Practically every device consumers own is tempting them at all hours with new films or songs or shows to purchase. Virtually no one bought anything on their computer just 20 years ago; the idea of using a phone to buy and read a 700-page book about a blind girl in occupied France would have sounded like a joke even 10 years ago. But today, our phones sell us every form of media imaginable; our TVs charge us for video-on-demand products; our car stereos urge us to sign up for SiriusXM. And just as there are more avenues for consumers to pay for creative work, there are more ways to be compensated for making that work."
In a dark corner of the Trans-Pacific Partnership lurks some pretty nasty copyright law; Washington Post, 9/3/15
David Post, Washington Post; In a dark corner of the Trans-Pacific Partnership lurks some pretty nasty copyright law:
"The copyright issue relates to so-called “orphan works.” As a consequence of many factors — the absurdly long term of copyright protection [life of the author plus 70 years — see my comments here on the liberation of Sherlock Holmes, after a lo-o-ong time, from his copyright shackles], along with the elimination of copyright notice, or copyright registration, requirements as preconditions for copyright protection — there are literally millions upon millions of works — books, letters, songs, articles, poems . . . — created in the ’30s, ’40s, or ’50s that are (a) still protected by copyright, and for which (b) it is virtually impossible to ascertain who owns the copyright, or even whether the copyright is still in force... The solution is pretty obvious — a true legislative no-brainer: Amend the Copyright Act to eliminate statutory damages for these orphan works. Surely even Congress can see how idiotic it is that this class of invisible rights holders can keep this treasure trove of information out of the public’s hands, and there has indeed been significant movement recently (including a Copyright Office proposal to this effect) toward just such a change. So what does all this have to do with the TPP? I’m glad you asked. It appears that the latest version of the treaty contains, buried within its many hundreds of pages, language that could require the U.S. to scuttle its plans for a sensible revision of this kind.[I say that this “appears” to be the case, because, of course, the text of the TPP has not been revealed to the public, so all we have are leaked versions appearing from time to time on WikiLeaks.]... These (and other — poke around at the KEI site for more evidence) copyright provisions in the TPP are pretty dreadful and continue the disturbing trend of making copyright bigger, longer and stronger just when public policy demands the opposite... [And as an ironic footnote to all this, part of the reason we’re in all this mess, as I mentioned at the start, is that we no longer have a sensible regime for copyright notice and copyright registration. Why don’t we? Because of another international agreement, the Berne Convention on Literary Property, that we acceded to in 1989 (and which prohibits all “copyright formalities).”] We would have been much, much better off on our own on that one."
Inspiration Or Appropriation? Behind Music Copyright Lawsuits; NPR, 9/5/15
Allyson McCabe, NPR; Inspiration Or Appropriation? Behind Music Copyright Lawsuits:
"Where do you draw the line between inspiration and appropriation when it comes to musical compositions? That question is at the heart of several high-profile court cases, including the recent "Blurred Lines" trial and a current copyright-infringement lawsuit involving "Stairway to Heaven." But it isn't always easy to prove a song is yours – particularly when you're up against one of the biggest rock and roll bands of all time."
Friday, September 4, 2015
Disney, Marvel, Lucasfilm & Sanrio slice into cake-frosting seller; ComicBookResources.com, 9/4/15
Kevin Melrose, ComicBookResources.com; Disney, Marvel, Lucasfilm & Sanrio slice into cake-frosting seller:
"Disney, Marvel and Lucasfilm have joined with Sanrio to stop a company from selling unlicensed cake frosting featuring their incredibly lucrative properties. As first reported by THR, Esq., the entertainment giants filed a trademark- and copyright-infringement lawsuit against George and Danielle Wilson, whose Wilson Cake Imaging offers printed, edible frosting sheets and cake toppers depicting a wide range of characters and performers."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)