Jeff John Roberts, Fortune; Lawyers Rally to Save ‘McMansion Hell’ from Zillow’s Copyright Claim
"A Zillow spokesperson has sent the following statement to media outlets:
"We are asking this blogger to take down the photos that are protected by copyright rules, but we did not demand she shut down her blog and hope she can find a way to continue her work," the statement reads.
The McMansion Hell controversy is likely to end with Wagner's site going back online, and with Zillow becoming the latest victim of what is known as "the Streisand effect"—a phenomenon in which an attempt to use dubious legal tactics to smother an issue on the Internet results in even more publicity for that issue. (Ironically, the original Streisand effect case—named for Barbara Streisand—also turned on mansions)."
Tuesday, June 27, 2017
Sleepless Nights for GCs Caused by Regulations and Crisis Management; Inside Counsel, June 22, 2017
Jennifer Williams-Alvarez, Inside Counsel; Sleepless Nights for GCs Caused by Regulations and Crisis Management
"The inaugural "General Counsel Up-at-Night" report looks at responses to an online survey conducted in spring 2017 from more than 200 U.S.-based general counsel and other in-house legal decision-makers.
"The inaugural "General Counsel Up-at-Night" report looks at responses to an online survey conducted in spring 2017 from more than 200 U.S.-based general counsel and other in-house legal decision-makers.
The results reveal that the most pressing challenges faced by respondents are: regulations and enforcement; privacy and data security; risk and crisis management; litigation; and intellectual property. Among these, the biggest concerns are regulations and enforcement, with 74 percent of respondents identifying this as a very important challenge, followed by privacy and data security with 65 percent and risk and crisis management with 63 percent."
Monday, June 26, 2017
Patents can stifle, as well as protect, stifle innovation; Albuquerque Journal, June 26, 2017
Joel Jacobsen, Albuquerque Journal;
Patents can stifle, as well as protect, stifle innovation
"The absence of patent protection would make it difficult if not impossible for many inventors to profit from their ingenuity. But when a second inventor vastly improves on an original idea, as Curtiss did, isn’t he equally entitled to reap the rewards of his own ingenuity? Even apart from questions of fairness, society benefits from both the original invention and its subsequent improvement. Both types of progress deserve legal protection."
Inventor's Corner: What happens when someone infringes a patent?; Sioux Falls Business Journal via Argus Journal, June 23, 2017
Jeffrey Proehl, for the Sioux Falls Business Journal via Argus Journal; Inventor's Corner: What happens when someone infringes a patent?
"Jeffrey Proehl is a registered patent attorney with Woods, Fuller, Shultz & Smith P.C. in Sioux Falls.
Although the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office grants patents, the U.S. government does not enforce patents against infringers. When a patent owner becomes aware someone without authorization is “making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing” a product that infringes the owner’s patent, the owner has the option to enforce the patent."
Sunday, June 25, 2017
How Bad Intellectual Property Laws Hurt Classic Video Game Consumers; Forbes, June 25, 2017
Adam Ozimek, Forbes; How Bad Intellectual Property Laws Hurt Classic Video Game Consumers
"The economic purpose of intellectual property is to incentivize the creation of products that would not otherwise be created. These laws can benefit consumers, but the granting of monopoly rights creates a cost as well. In terms of balancing costs and benefits, the current copyright system is -to be frank- absurd. A look at how excessive copyright is harming back video game consumers makes that clear."
"The economic purpose of intellectual property is to incentivize the creation of products that would not otherwise be created. These laws can benefit consumers, but the granting of monopoly rights creates a cost as well. In terms of balancing costs and benefits, the current copyright system is -to be frank- absurd. A look at how excessive copyright is harming back video game consumers makes that clear."
The great intellectual property trade-off; BBC, June 25, 2017
Tim Harford, BBC; The great intellectual property trade-off
"For most economists, scrapping intellectual property entirely is going too far. They point to important cases - such as new medicines - where the costs of invention are enormous and the costs of copying are trivial.
"For most economists, scrapping intellectual property entirely is going too far. They point to important cases - such as new medicines - where the costs of invention are enormous and the costs of copying are trivial.
But those who defend intellectual property protections still tend to argue that - right now - those protections offer more than enough incentive to create new ideas.
Dickens himself eventually discovered a financial upside to weak copyright protection.
Twenty five years after his initial visit to the US, Dickens returned, keen to make some money.
He reckoned that so many people had read cheap knock-offs of his stories that he could cash in on his fame with a lecture tour. He was absolutely right: off the back of pirated copies of his work, Charles Dickens made a fortune as a public speaker, many millions of dollars in today's terms.
Perhaps the intellectual property was worth more when given away."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)