Carla Hayden is one Senate vote away from becoming a groundbreaking librarian of Congress; Washington Post, 6/10/16

Peggy McGlone, Washington Post; Carla Hayden is one Senate vote away from becoming a groundbreaking librarian of Congress:

[Kip Currier: Carla Hayden was an Assistant Professor in the Library and Information Science Department of the University of Pittsburgh School of Information Sciences from 1987-1991.]

"Carla D. Hayden — President Obama’s nominee to become the 14th librarian of Congress — is one vote away from making history.

The Senate Rules Committee recommended that the full Senate approve the nomination of Hayden, 63, to become the new head of the Library of Congress. If approved, the head of Baltimore’s public library system would be the first woman and the first African American to lead the federal agency.

A past president of the American Library Association, Hayden has served on the National Museum and Library Services Board since 2010. She earned a master’s degree and doctorate from the University of Chicago. She is credited with improving the Enoch Pratt Free Library in Baltimore, where she has been chief executive for 23 years, by upgrading its technology and establishing it as a vital community resource...

Appearing before the Senate committee in April, Hayden acknowledged the challenges facing the sprawling library. Last year, a congressional report criticized the agency for widespread technological failures that wasted tax dollars and caused problems for the Copyright Office and for services for the disabled. Hayden told lawmakers she believed the library could become a model for all libraries, which must adapt to a changing world...

The oldest federal cultural institution, the Library of Congress has 3,200 employees and an annual budget of $630 million. It serves as the research arm of Congress, provides Congress with legal advice and runs the Copyright Office, a major player in the world’s digital economy."

Led Zeppelin’s ’Stairway to Heaven’ in Copyright Trial; Wall Street Journal, 6/14/16

[Video] Mark Kelly, Wall Street Journal; Led Zeppelin’s ’Stairway to Heaven’ in Copyright Trial:

"A jury trial begins on Tuesday in Los Angeles to determine whether the opening notes to Led Zeppelin's "Stairway to Heaven" were copied from the song "Taurus" by the band Spirit."

Citigroup Sues AT&T Over 'Thanks' Word: Copyright Infringement; Tech Times, 6/12/16

Horia Ungureanu, Tech Times; Citigroup Sues AT&T Over 'Thanks' Word: Copyright Infringement:

[Kip Currier: 2 mistakes in this Tech Times article: 1. In the headline. Copyright is neither relevant nor at issue in this case. 2. The Tech Times article's author says "Gizmodo showcases a picture of the patent, in case you need to see it to believe it.", but Patent is not relevant in this case either.

These are two striking examples of how different types of intellectual property are so often misunderstood and confused with one another. This story is an example of Trademark and Gizmodo gets the story right.]

"An unlikely lawsuit started as Citigroup filed a complaint against AT&T, which the credit card company says is infringing upon its trademark.

AT&T did not steal Citigroup's logo or slogan or anything of the sort, but it did have the audacity to use the word "thanks" in a campaign addressing customer-loyalty. The bank sued the telecom company, underlining the fact that it has secured a trademark for the word "thanks" some years ago.

This is not a late April Fool's Day joke, although we really wish it was.

According to the legal complaint that was filed in a Manhattan federal court, AT&T's campaign infringes a few of the trademarks of Citigroup. For example, the credit card enterprise owns both "Citi ThankYou" and "ThankYou." Gizmodo showcases a picture of the patent, in case you need to see it to believe it.

As a reminder, Citigroup has been making use of the "ThankYou" trademark since 2004, when it began a customer-loyalty program. The company says that over seven million of its clients have credit cards with the ThankYou slogan written in big letter across them."

New York Times Says Fair Use Of 300 Words Will Run You About $1800; New York Times, 6/10/16

Tim Cushing, TechDirt; New York Times Says Fair Use Of 300 Words Will Run You About $1800:

"Fair use is apparently the last refuge of a scofflaw. Following on the heels of a Sony rep's assertion that people could avail themselves of fair use for the right price, here comes the New York Times implying fair use not only does not exist, but that it runs more than $6/word.

Obtaining formal permission to use three quotations from New York Times articles in a book ultimately cost two professors $1,884. They’re outraged, and have taken to Kickstarter — in part to recoup the charges, but primarily, they say, to “protest the Times’ and publishers’ lack of respect for Fair Use.”

These professors used quotes from other sources in their book about press coverage of health issues, but only the Gray Lady stood there with her hand out, expecting nearly $2,000 in exchange for three quotes totalling less than 300 words.

The professors paid, but the New York Times "policy" just ensures it will be avoided by others looking to source quotes for their publications. The high rate it charges (which it claims is a "20% discount") for fair use of its work will be viewed by others as proxy censorship. And when censorship of this sort rears its head, most people just route around it. Other sources will be sought and the New York Times won't be padding its bottom line with ridiculous fees for de minimis use of its articles.

The authors' Kickstarter isn't so much to pay off the Times, but more to raise awareness of the publication's unwillingness to respect fair use."

The OPEN Government Data Act Would, Uh, Open Government Data; Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), 6/10/16

Elliot Harmon and Aaron Mackey, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF); The OPEN Government Data Act Would, Uh, Open Government Data:

"The U.S. government has made huge strides in its open data practices over the last few years. Since it launched in 2009, data.gov has become a crucial source for everything from climate and agricultural data to Department of Education records. For the most part, this new era of data disclosure didn’t happen because Congress passed new laws; it happened through presidential orders and procedural improvements in the Executive Branch.

Unfortunately, it might be just as easy for future administrations to roll back the current open data program. That’s why EFF supports a bill that would mandate public access to government data and urges Congress to pass it.

Recently introduced in both the House and Senate, the Open, Public, Electronic, and Necessary Government Data Act (OPEN Data Act, S. 2852, H.R. 5051) would require all federal government agencies to automatically make public any data sets they produce, subject to narrow exceptions for national security or other reasons (more on those reasons in a minute).

It would also require that that data be shared in a machine-readable format—that is, a format that can be processed by a computer without a person having to manually tinker with each entry. In 2013, President Obama issued an executive order that government data be shared in machine-readable formats. The OPEN Government Data Act would lock that requirement into law and provide a stronger legal definition for machine-readable data.

EFF applauds the OPEN Data Act and hopes to see it pass. By turning the good practices that the Executive Branch has gradually adopted into law, the OPEN Data Act can help usher in a new era for U.S. data transparency."

Open access: All human knowledge is there—so why can’t everybody access it?; Ars Technica, 6/7/16

Glyn Moody, Ars Technica; Open access: All human knowledge is there—so why can’t everybody access it? :

"In 1836, Anthony Panizzi, who later became principal librarian of the British Museum, gave evidence before a parliamentary select committee. At that time, he was only first assistant librarian, but even then he had an ambitious vision for what would one day became the British Library. He told the committee:

I want a poor student to have the same means of indulging his learned curiosity, of following his rational pursuits, of consulting the same authorities, of fathoming the most intricate inquiry as the richest man in the kingdom, as far as books go, and I contend that the government is bound to give him the most liberal and unlimited assistance in this respect...

The example of The Pirate Bay shows that the current game of domain whack-a-mole is not one that the lawyers are likely to win. But even if they did, it is too late.

Science magazine's analysis of Sci-Hub downloads reveals that the busiest city location is Tehran. It wrote: "Much of that is from Iranians using programs to automatically download huge swathes of Sci-Hub’s papers to make a local mirror of the site. Rahimi, an engineering student in Tehran, confirms this. 'There are several Persian sites similar to Sci-Hub'."

In this, people are following in the footsteps of Aaron Swartz, with the difference that we don't know what he intended to do with the millions of articles he had downloaded, whereas those mirroring Sci-Hub certainly intend to share the contents widely. It would be surprising if others around the world, especially in emerging economies, are not busily downloading all 45 million papers to do the same."

Beyoncé faces lawsuit over claims Lemonade trailer 'copied' ideas; Guardian, 6/9/16

Guardian; Beyoncé faces lawsuit over claims Lemonade trailer 'copied' ideas:

"A filmmaker has issued a lawsuit against Beyoncé, claiming the trailer for her visual album Lemonade copied images from a short film he had made.

Matthew Fulks says his film Palinoia had been seen by a member of Beyoncé’s team, and that a number of scenes appeared to have been recreated in the Lemonade trailer. “The number of aesthetic decisions included in Plaintiff’s Palinoia Work that are parroted in Defendants’ Lemonade Trailer demonstrates that the Lemonade Trailer is substantially similar to the Palinoia Work,” the complaint says. “The misappropriated content includes both the particular elements that the Plaintiff chose to comprise the Palinoia Work and the coordination and arrangement of those particular elements.”"