‘This Land Is Your Land’ Is Still Private Property, Court Rules; The New York Times, Febraury 28, 2020

Ben Sisario, The New York Times;

‘This Land Is Your Land’ Is Still Private Property, Court Rules

A federal judge shot down a challenge to the copyright of the Woody Guthrie folk anthem, blocking an attempt to put it in the public domain.

"First, “Happy Birthday to You” lost its copyright. Then “We Shall Overcome” became public domain as well.

But on Friday, Woody Guthrie’s “This Land Is Your Land” avoided what had been shaping up as a growing trend affecting the copyright owners of old songs, as the publishers of “This Land” defeated a challenge against it...

On Friday, Judge P. Kevin Castel of Federal District Court in Manhattan did not reach a decision on whether the song deserved to keep its copyright, because he said he didn’t have to. He ruled that there was no legal dispute for him to adjudicate: Satorii had already paid the license fee, and in exchange, the publisher had agreed to let Satorii do what it wanted with the song. The judge dismissed the case."

2019 IP Law Year in Review: Copyrights; The National Law Review, February 25, 2020

Jodi Benassi, Mary Hallerman, Nicole M. Jantzi, The National Law Review; 2019 IP Law Year in Review: Copyrights

"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In many ways, copyright jurisprudence in 2019 was a study in contrasts. While certain cases represented a “back to basics” approach, answering fundamental questions such as “When can a copyright owner sue for copyright infringement?” and “What costs can a prevailing copyright owner recover?,” others addressed thorny issues involving fair use and the first sale doctrine.

In the wake of several pivotal copyright decisions involving the music industry in 2018, such as the watershed “Blurred Lines” verdict, disputes involving music continued to provide fuel for the courts to weigh in on copyright this year. As we look to 2020, all eyes will be on the Supreme Court and its decision in the epic battle between Google and Oracle and the protectability of software. This report provides a summary of 2019’s important copyright decisions with the hopes of assisting those navigating copyright infringement and enforcement issues in the coming year."

Smithsonian Releases 2.8 Million Images Into Public Domain; Smithsonian Magazine, February 25, 2020

Katherine J. Wu , Smithsonian Magazine; Smithsonian Releases 2.8 Million Images Into Public Domain

"For the first time in its 174-year history, the Smithsonian has released 2.8 million high-resolution two- and three-dimensional images from across its collections onto an open access online platform for patrons to peruse and download free of charge. Featuring data and material from all 19 Smithsonian museums, nine research centers, libraries, archives and the National Zoo, the new digital depot encourages the public to not just view its contents, but use, reuse and transform them into just about anything they choose—be it a postcard, a beer koozie or a pair of bootie shorts.

And this gargantuan data dump is just the beginning. Throughout the rest of 2020, the Smithsonian will be rolling out another 200,000 or so images, with more to come as the Institution continues to digitize its collection of 155 million items and counting...

The database’s launch also marks the latest victory for a growing global effort to migrate museum collections into the public domain. Nearly 200 other institutions worldwide—including Amsterdam’s Rijksmuseum, New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Art Institute of Chicago—have made similar moves to digitize and liberate their masterworks in recent years. But the scale of the Smithsonian’s release is “unprecedented” in both depth and breadth, says Simon Tanner, an expert in digital cultural heritage at King’s College London.

Spanning the arts and humanities to science and engineering, the release compiles artifacts, specimens and datasets from an array of fields onto a single online platform."

The Phillies Unveil a New Phanatic as Lawyers Fight Over Mascot Copyright; The New York Times, February 24, 2020

Mihir Zaveri, The New York Times; The Phillies Unveil a New Phanatic as Lawyers Fight Over Mascot Copyright

"In court papers filed in August, the Phillies said that Harrison/Erickson, the New York-based design and marketing firm that worked on the mascot’s design in 1978, improperly wanted to terminate an agreement over the Phanatic’s copyright...

Josh Gerben, an intellectual property lawyer who is not involved in the litigation, said that the Phanatic’s new design was likely an attempt by the Phillies to show that they had changed the mascot enough over the years that it was no longer covered by Harrison/Erickson’s copyright.

He was surprised that the Phillies had not settled the case — a possible indication, he said, that Harrison/Erickson was asking for a large sum. If the case does go to trial, he said, it would be hard to predict what a jury would do."

Feds to US Firms: Watch Out for Employees Trying to Steal Trade Secrets for China; PC Mag, February 26, 2020

Michael Kan, PC Mag; Feds to US Firms: Watch Out for Employees Trying to Steal Trade Secrets for China

"“It’s not a spy versus spy game anymore,” said William Evanina, Director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center, during the panel. “This is the businessman, the engineer, the scientist, the student, the professor.”...

To stop the intellectual property theft, the feds are urging US companies to protect against insider threats, which can be spurred on both by foreign governments and domestic rivals, they noted. But the answer isn’t to profile employees or stop hiring staffers from certain countries, [John] Demers[US Assistant Attorney General for National Security] said. He suggests companies develop internal systems that can track when employees are accessing sensitive company files, which can help pinpoint when a IP theft might be occurring. For example, if a soon-to-be ex-staffer is suddenly accessing a huge trove of a confidential documents, the system should immediately flag the download to company administrators."

Universities And The Commercialization Of Intellectual Property; Forbes, February 25, 2020

Afshin Doust, Forbes; Universities And The Commercialization Of Intellectual Property

"Universities are, as McLuhan came to understand from his career as a professor, bureaucratic institutions -- risk-averse and prone to discriminate against whatever is politically incorrect. This characteristic is also true of modern research universities, glorified though they are as idea factories.

Administrators might talk up breakthroughs and research acumen, but a typical university will nevertheless direct its resources toward things other than the commercialization of innovations that emerge on campus. When business owners inquire about accessing those innovations, many schools hem and haw, unsure of how to proceed because “those who can’t do, teach,” all the while demanding concessions from the private sector that amount to administrators wanting to have their IP cake and eat it, too."

WIPO Publishes Submissions on AI and IP Policy; IP Watchdog, February 24, 2020

James Nurton, IP Watchdog; WIPO Publishes Submissions on AI and IP Policy

"Twenty-two member states of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), more than 100 organizations, and over 100 individuals have submitted comments and suggestions in response to WIPO’s Draft Issues Paper on IP Policy and AI.

The submissions have been posted in the form and in the languages in which they were received on WIPO’s website.

The comments will feed into a revised issues paper for discussion at the second session of the WIPO Conversation on IP and AI, which takes place in Geneva in May 2020."