Unofficial Software Incurs Apple's Wrath; The New York Times, 5/13/09

Via The New York Times; Unofficial Software Incurs Apple's Wrath:

"Jailbreaking is different from unlocking an iPhone, in which users modify the software so the phone can be used on unauthorized wireless carriers...

But according to Apple, jailbreaking is illegal and a breach of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act...

In a legal filing with the United States Copyright Office last year, Apple says jailbroken iPhones rely on modified versions of Apple’s operating software that infringe on its copyrights.

In addition, the company says jailbreaking encourages the piracy of approved iPhone applications and is an expensive burden...

Apple filed its brief in response to the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s request that the copyright office recognize an exemption to the digital copyright act that would permit jailbreaking of iPhones and other devices. The copyright office is expected to rule on the issue by October.

Jailbreaking your own iPhone does not infringe on any copyright, and the tools that help iPhone owners modify their devices do not distribute anything that belongs to Apple, said Fred von Lohmann, a senior staff lawyer with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit group that advocates more openness on the Internet. “In our view, consumers are allowed to adapt software for their own personal use,” he said."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/technology/13jailbreak.html?pagewanted=1&sq=copyright&st=cse&scp=5

All's Fair Under Fair Use?; Forbes.com, 5/13/09

Via Forbes.com; All's Fair Under Fair Use?: A nebulous legal doctrine collides with collapsing ad revenues and explosive growth in digital news:

"On a late May morning, Srinandan R. Kasi, general counsel for the Associated Press, eyes four clusters of blue dots scattered across his computer screen as if they were a crime scene. Each dot represents a unique URL hosting content carrying a digital fingerprint of an AP-produced story.

Most dots, says Kasi, are infringers--sites who carry AP work without permission, or don't link material back to the AP...

The issue at hand: abuse of "fair use," a nebulous legal doctrine that allows use of copyrighted material without permission from the creators. The AP has been wrangling with Google and other aggregators over its definition for three years.

Now, with a collapsing ad pie and explosive growth in digital news platforms, defining fair use is suddenly critical for media companies from The New York Times and The Washington Post to conglomerates like News Corp. and Time Warner.

Yet for all its importance, it remains a tricky concept courts determine on an agonizing case-by-case basis--making it difficult to determine whether the Next Big Thing on the Web is providing a valuable public service or violating copyright law on a wholesale basis."

http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/12/copyright-fair-use-business-media-fair-use.html

Print Books Are Target of Pirates on the Web; The New York Times, 5/12/09

Via The New York Times; Print Books Are Target of Pirates on the Web:

"For now, electronic piracy of books does not seem as widespread as what hit the music world, when file-sharing services like Napster threatened to take down the whole industry.

Publishers and authors say they can learn from their peers in music, who alienated fans by using the courts aggressively to go after college students and Napster before it converted to a legitimate online store.

“If iTunes started three years earlier, I’m not sure how big Napster and the subsequent piratical environments would have been, because people would have been in the habit of legitimately purchasing at pricing that wasn’t considered pernicious,” said Richard Sarnoff, a chairman of Bertelsmann, which owns Random House, the world’s largest publisher of consumer titles...

Others view digital piracy as a way for new readers to discover writers. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/12/technology/internet/12digital.html?scp=2&sq=piracy&st=cse

Lawrence Lessig's (2008) Remix Book Freely Accessible under CC License via Bloomsbury Academic, 5/11/09

Lawrence Lessig's (2008) Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy is now freely accessible under a Creative Commons license via Bloomsbury Academic. For PDF link, see:

http://www.bloomsburyacademic.com/remix.htm

Bootlegging Dickens: A Novel Look At 'Bookaneers'; Podcast [5 min. 18 sec.] via NPR's All Things Considered, 5/10/09

Podcast [5 min. 18 sec.] via NPR's All Things Considered; Bootlegging Dickens: A Novel Look At 'Bookaneers':

"Hollywood is constantly battling overseas bootleggers. But in the 19th century, publishers in the United States made a fortune bootlegging British authors — even the biggest, like Charles Dickens."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103993065

Lawrence Lessig responds to Mark Helprin's argument; Podcast [9 min. 49 sec.] via NPR's All Things Considered, 4/26/09

Podcast [9 min. 49 sec.] via NPR's All Things Considered; Lawrence Lessig responds to Mark Helprin's argument:

http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=103508516&m=103505647

'Digital Barbarism' Wages Online Copyright Battle; Podcast [7 min. 34 sec.] via NPR's All Things Considered, 4/26/09

Pocast [7 in. 34 sec.] via NPR's All Things Considered; 'Digital Barbarism' Wages Online Copyright Battle:

"Author Mark Helprin wrote the novels A Soldier of the Great War and Winter's Tale. And two years ago, he wrote an op-ed in the New York Times that inspired a huge online backlash [see A Great Idea Lives Forever. Shouldn’t Its Copyright?http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/20/opinion/20helprin.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all.]

In the op-ed, Helprin argued that the term for copyright protection should be extended to protect the author's individual voice from the pressures of the digital age. For his boldness, he faced the digital wrath of those who feel the term of copyright protection should be reduced or eliminated altogether.

He's responded to the backlash in the form of a book, Digital Barbarism: A Writer's Manifesto.

One of the most prominent opponents to Helprin's idea to extend copyright has been Lawrence Lessig. He's a professor of law at Stanford University and the founder of Creative Commons, a system that allows creators to opt out of certain copyright protections.

Unlike Helprin, Lessig believes in the power of group collaboration to build ideas. So instead of writing a response himself, he created a wiki and asked his followers to work together to write it [see http://wiki.lessig.org/index.php/Against_perpetual_copyright].

He says that he understands Helprin's concerns about intellectual work being altered, but that as a published author, it comes with the territory."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103508516

Online Debate on "Copyright and wrongs"; Economist.com, 5/5/09 -

Via Economist.com; Online Debate on "Copyright and wrongs":

Noted intellectual property scholars weigh in on the motion "This house believes that existing copyright laws do more harm than good."

http://goliveinternet.economist.com/debate/overview/144

E.U. to Hear Proposal for Cross-Border Net Copyright; The New York Times, 5/5/09

Via The New York Times: E.U. to Hear Proposal for Cross-Border Net Copyright:

"Two European commissioners are proposing the creation of a Europewide copyright license for online content that could clear the way for cross-border sales of digital music, games and video — and lower prices for consumers...

Cross-border sales of online film and music is rare in the E.U. because most retailers generally do not want to deal with the complexity of satisfying 27 different national copyright systems, which are administered by semi-autonomous collecting societies that levy and collect fees on each sale."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/05/business/global/copyright.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=copyright&st=cse

New York Law School to Launch Public Interest Book Search Initiative Project; New York Law School Press Release, 5/6/09

Via New York Law School Press Release; New York Law School to Launch Public Interest Book Search Initiative Project to Be Led by Recognized Expert on Google Book Lawsuit:

"New York Law School today announced the launch of the Public Interest Book Search Initiative, a new program developed to foster public discussion about the law and policy of digitizing books, making them searchable, and distributing them online.

The new initiative reinforces New York Law School's leading role in the academic study of the future of publishing and will be led by Professor James Grimmelmann, a recognized expert on copyright law and the Authors Guild v. Google lawsuit. Professor Grimmelmann is often quoted in the media about the lawsuit, and his article "How to Fix the Google Book Search Settlement" is the most frequently cited and discussed analysis of the proposed settlement...

The key components of the Public Interest Book Search Initiative are: a Web site for discussion of the proposed settlement, an open-source amicus brief, and a conference on the settlement."

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2009/05/prweb2392184.htm

Library groups gripe about Google Book Search; CNet News, 5/4/09

Via CNet News: Library groups gripe about Google Book Search:

"Three groups representing hundreds of libraries lodged a long series of concerns about a proposed settlement of lawsuits over Google Book Search on Monday--but refrained from objecting overall.

Specifically, the American Library Association, the Association of College and Research Libraries, and the Association of Research Libraries expressed some affinity for Google's mission of sharing books with the public, but raised concerns in a legal filing that the settlement would concentrate power in Google's hands and poses pricing and privacy concerns."

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10233158-93.html

Wolverine': Experts Weigh In On Effects Of Leak; MTV.com, 5//4/09

Via MTV.com; 'Wolverine': Experts Weigh In On Effects Of Leak: 'X-Men Origins: Wolverine' nabbed $90 million at the box office, but that doesn't mean online piracy is harmless:

"The general public, however, seemed to have less exposure to the leak. "I think what really helped 'Wolverine' overcome the piracy issue [was] the people who went out to see it were probably more casual moviegoers than just the comic people," said Edward Douglas of movie site ComingSoon.net. "Which is why 'Wolverine' ended up opening so much bigger than 'Watchmen,' " which made $55 million during its debut weekend in March. Douglas added that a lower running time and a PG-13 benefited "Wolverine" too...

Will the remarkable $90 million opening for "Wolverine," despite its illegal online exposure, have other studio execs breathing a sigh of relief? Don't count on it, Poland said.

"If the 'Wolverine' leak is only the beginning, then the film industry has a major, major problem," he said. "Anomalies are always given too much attention, but when anything becomes standard, it has a very different impact.""

http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1610564/story.jhtml

Google's Book Search Deal: 5 Pros and 5 Cons; PC World, 4/29/09

Via PC World; Google's Book Search Deal: 5 Pros and 5 Cons:

"Understanding Google's Settlement

The Book Search settlement, announced in October, followed a three-year battle over Google's right to display copyrighted books on its Web site. The Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers claimed Google was violating copyrights by doing so. Google eventually agreed to pay $125 million to ensure authors and publishers could register to receive payments anytime their books were viewed within the service.

The deal is proving to be quite divisive, and now, with the Justice Department's reported antitrust investigation, things could get even more dicey. Here's a look at five key arguments from both sides of the debate."

http://www.pcworld.com/article/164096/googles_book_search_deal_5_pros_and_5_cons.html

Justice Dept. Opens Antitrust Inquiry Into Google Books Deal; The New York Times, 4/28/09

Via The New York Times: Justice Dept. Opens Antitrust Inquiry Into Google Books Deal:

"The Justice Department has begun an inquiry into the antitrust implications of Google’s settlement with authors and publishers over its Google Book Search service, two people briefed on the matter said Tuesday.

Lawyers for the Justice Department have been in conversations in recent weeks with various groups opposed to the settlement, including the Internet Archive and Consumer Watchdog. More recently, Justice Department lawyers notified the parties to the settlement, including Google, and representatives for the Association of American Publishers and the Authors Guild, that they were looking into various antitrust issues related to the far-reaching agreement.

The inquiry does not necessarily mean that the department will oppose the settlement, which is subject to a court review. But it suggests that some of the concerns raised by critics, who say the settlement would unfairly give Google an exclusive license to profit from millions of books, have resonated with the Justice Department."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/29/technology/internet/29google.html

Google seeks more time in Book Search case; CNet News, 4/27/09

Via CNet News; Google seeks more time in Book Search case:

"Google said Monday it's seeking 60 more days to find authors and persuade them of what it believes are the merits of a settlement involving its online Book Search service...

Google is facing resistance to the settlement.

Seven authors last week requested a four-month extension (PDF) of the May 5 deadline due to the complexity of the proposed settlement, among other reasons.

"First, two months' time is insufficient to understand the implications of a settlement of this scope," the appeal letter reads. "Second, substantial defects in notice of the settlement undermine authors' ability to assess their rights; and third, more time is required simply to understand the complex terms of the agreement.""

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10228345-93.html

To rip or not to rip?: Is backing up a DVD fair use or piracy?; Economist.com, 5/1/09

Via Economist.com; To rip or not to rip?: Is backing up a DVD fair use or piracy?:

"SHOULD people who have bought DVDs legally be allowed to make digital copies of them for their own use? Any reasonable person would say yes. In copyright terms, that ought to be considered “fair use”. The law, however, presently says otherwise...

The one way you can legally copy a DVD, at least for the moment, is to buy one of the $10,000 home-server and player combos beloved by Hollywood moguls and made by a Silicon Valley firm called Kaleidescape."

http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13579732

In digital age, can movie piracy be stopped?; CNN.com Technology, 5/2/09

Via CNN.com Technology: In digital age, can movie piracy be stopped?:

"Greg Sandoval, who covers media and digital entertainment for CNET News, said that in the digital age, thieves can gain access to near-perfect advance copies of films on DVD that have greater potential to undermine a movie's box-office prospects.

And even studios' attempts at safeguarding their products against piracy, such as by encoding DVDs with digital watermarks that allow authorities to trace individual copies, aren't enough, Sandoval said.

He said tech-savvy thieves have figured out how to strip such watermarks from DVDs.

"When you're talking about digital content ... it's impossible to lock it down completely" from theft, Sandoval said. "These hackers are very creative. Sometimes, they're one step ahead of the security experts."...

John Malcolm, director of worldwide anti-piracy operations for the Motion Picture Association of America, said digital piracy can take many forms, including peer-to-peer file sharing and streaming.

Malcolm said the association is conducting a lot of outreach to universities and Internet service providers to help them address piracy that occurs over their systems.

The issue is global, Malcolm said, as evidenced by pending litigation in France that would shut down Internet accounts of illegal downloaders."

http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/05/01/wolverine.movie.piracy/index.html

High-Def 'Hunt For Gollum,' New Lord Of The Fanvids; Podcast Via NPR, All Things Considered, 4/30/09

Podcast [3 min. 3 sec.] Via NPR, All Things Considered: High-Def 'Hunt For Gollum,' New Lord Of The Fanvids:

"Of course, Academy Award-winning writer-director Peter Jackson might not consider this production a tribute. New Line Cinema, which produced the Lord of the Rings trilogy, and the J.R.R. Tolkien family, which owns the rights to the books, might have a thing or two to say about it as well.

It's an interesting question to Fred Von Lohman, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Von Lohman says it's not really clear whether Bouchard and his crew of volunteers are in violation of the copyright for Tolkien's work."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103673352

When Pixels Find New Life on Real Paper; The New York Times, 4/20/09

Via The New York Times; When Pixels Find New Life on Real Paper:

"One trick in transferring the material from online to print has been how to recreate the “title text” that comments on the strip when your cursor hovers over it...

The title text will appear where the tiny copyright notice would appear on a traditional strip.

Does that mean that the book won’t carry a traditional copyright and instead take its lead from the online comic strip itself, which Mr. Munroe licenses under Creative Commons, allowing noncommercial re-use as long as credit is given?

“To anyone who wants to photocopy, bind, and give a copy of the book to their loved one — more power to them,” he said. “He/She will likely be disappointed that you’re so cheap, though.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/business/media/20link.html

Judge Bars the Internet From the Courtroom in a File-Sharing Case; Chronicle of Higher Education, The Wired Campus, 4/17/09

Chronicle of Higher Education, The Wired Campus: Judge Bars the Internet From the Courtroom in a File-Sharing Case:

"Charles Nesson, a Harvard Law School professor, had asked to Webcast a court hearing in the case against his client Joel Tenenbaum, a graduate student at Boston University whom Sony BMG Music Entertainment sued for copyright infringement. The presiding federal judge, Nancy Gertner, approved the request in January. But the recording industry, fearing that the hearing in U.S. District Court in Boston would become a circus, appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

Today, that court barred the Webcast, which was to be recorded by the Courtroom View Network and carried gavel to gavel by Harvard’s Berkman Center for Internet & Society. Judicial rules close federal courtrooms in Massachusetts to all forms of broadcasting, including Webcasting, Judge Bruce M. Selya wrote in the ruling."

http://chronicle.com/wiredcampus/index.php?id=3720&utm_source=wc&utm_medium=en

Objection to Google Scanning Settlement Filed; American Libraries, 4/15/09

Via American Libraries: Objection to Google Scanning Settlement Filed:

"The consumer advocacy group Consumer Watchdog has sent a letter to the Justice Department asking to delay implementation of the October 2008 settlement of publisher lawsuits over Google’s scanning of copyrighted books. Concerns from more groups, including the American Library Association, are anticipated before the May 5 deadline for filing objections.

Consumer Watchdog’s April 1 letter (PDF file) argued that the settlement’s “most favored nation” clause guarantees Google the same terms from the proposed Book Rights Registry that any future competitor might be offered, which may prevent competition."

http://www.ala.org/ala/alonline/currentnews/newsarchive/2009/april2009/googlescanobjections.cfm

Don Henley sues Senate candidate over song use; CNN.com, 4/18/09

Via Cnn.com: Don Henley sues Senate candidate over song use:

"Don Henley, a founding member of "The Eagles," is suing a Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate, claiming the candidate is misusing two of his popular songs.

The suit filed Friday in federal court in California claims Charles DeVore is using Henley's hit songs "The Boys of Summer" and "All She Wants to Do Is Dance" without authorization...

"We're responding with a counter-claim, asserting our First Amendment right to political free speech," the site said. "While the legal issues play out, it's time to up the ante on Mr. Henley's liberal goon tactics. By popular request, I have penned the words to our new parody song."

DeVore then posted the lyrics of a song he called "All She Wants to Do Is Tax."

http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/Music/04/18/henley.lawsuit/index.html

Court jails Pirate Bay founders; Via BBC News, 4/17/09

Via BBC News; Court jails Pirate Bay founders:

"Speaking on Swedish Radio, assistant judge Klarius explained how the court reached its findings.

The court first tried whether there was any question of breach of copyright by the file-sharing application and that has been proved, that the offence was committed.

"The court then moved on to look at those who acted as a team to operate the Pirate Bay file-sharing service, and the court found that they knew that material which was protected by copyright but continued to operate the service," he said."...

Rickard Falkvinge, leader of The Pirate Party - which is trying to reform laws around copyright and patents in the digital age - told the BBC that the verdict was "a gross injustice".

"This wasn't a criminal trial, it was a political trial. It is just gross beyond description that you can jail four people for providing infrastructure.

"There is a lot of anger in Sweden right now. File-sharing is an institution here and while I can't encourage people to break copyright law, I'm not following it and I don't agree with it.

"Today's events make file-sharing a hot political issue and we're going to take this to the European Parliament."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8003799.stm

File-Sharing Site Violated Copyright, Court Says; The New York Times, 4/17/09

The New York Times; File-Sharing Site Violated Copyright, Court Says:

A court in Sweden on Friday convicted four men linked to the notorious Internet file-sharing service The Pirate Bay of violating copyright law, handing the music and movie industries a high-profile victory in their campaign to curb online piracy...

Mark Mulligan, an analyst at Forrester Research, said the decision Friday would not result in a “meaningful” decrease in piracy. Internet users are turning to new ways to share music, including streaming and messaging services, which are harder for copyright owners and enforcement officials to detect than downloads.

But he said the ruling was “good p.r.” for the music and movie industries.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/18/world/europe/18copy.html

The Pirate Bay on the politics of copyright, Globe and Mail, 4/17/09

Via Globe and Mail; The Pirate Bay on the politics of copyright:

"Earlier Friday morning a Swedish judge found four men connected with the popular file sharing site The Pirate Bay guilty of contributing to copyright violations.

Already online observers are calling the decsision a monumental shift in the battle over copyright protection.

The landmark decision has each of the four men facing a year in jail and collective fines of $3.6-million (U.S.).

The Pirate Bay is a sort of underground Google for downloadable media files, where users can seach for and look up music, movies and tv shows to download using a file sharing technology known as BitTorrent. The music and movie industries say that most of the files the Pirate Bay links to infringe on copyrights and have made the site Enemy No. 1 in their fight against piracy.
Pirate Bay has more than 22 million users worldwide on an average day, its tracking system has been accessed more than 4 billion times and some experts believe that the site accounts for as much as two thirds of the world's torrent files. "

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090417.wgtpiratebaypodcast0417/BNStory/Technology/home

Google Insists It’s a Friend to Newspapers, The New York Times, 4/8/09

Via The New York Times: Google Insists It’s a Friend to Newspapers:

"It had the makings of a high-tension face-off: Eric E. Schmidt, Google’s chief executive, spoke Tuesday at a convention of newspaper executives at a time when a growing chorus in the struggling industry is accusing Google of succeeding, in part, at their expense...

His speech was followed by polite questions from industry executives that only briefly touched upon a perennially sore point: whether the use of headlines and snippets of newspaper stories on Google News is “fair use” under copyright law or a misappropriation of newspaper content...

“While Google News generates a lot of audience, ultimately, the question is going to be who is going to make the money out of that: Google or the publishers.”...

Google has long insisted that its use of snippets and headlines in Google News is legal. It also said Google News drove a huge amount of traffic to newspaper Web sites, which the publishers monetize through advertising...

Newspaper companies have been unwilling to test the issue in court, where Google’s fair-use arguments could prevail, and it is not clear that The A.P. plans to do so."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/08/technology/internet/08google.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=google%20fair%20use&st=cse

They Pay for Cable, Music and Extra Bags. How About News?; The New York Times, 4/7/09

Via The New York Times: They Pay for Cable, Music and Extra Bags. How About News?:

"Just a year ago, most media companies believed the formula for Internet success was to offer free content, build an audience and rake in advertising dollars. Now, with the recession battering advertising online, in print and on television, media executives are contemplating a tougher trick: making the consumer pay...

“People reading news for free on the Web, that’s got to change,” Mr. Murdoch said last week at a cable industry conference in Washington...

But from networks selling downloads of TV shows, to music companies trying to curb file-sharing, to struggling newspapers and magazines, the make-or-break question is this: How do you get consumers to pay for something they have grown used to getting free?

Some industries have pulled it off. Coca-Cola took tap water, filtered it and called it Dasani, and makes millions of dollars a year...

All of these success stories offered the consumer something extra, even if it was just convenience...

“With downloads, the benefit is that the paying services allow you to sample many songs free, and you know it’s legal, and the TV shows have no commercials...

The free-versus-paid debate is a recurring one. At the birth of the Internet many sites charged for content, but by the late 1990s the prevailing view was that market forces favored free content...

Getting customers to pay is easier if the product is somehow better — or perceived as being better — than what they had received free."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/08/business/media/08pay.html

Coldplay Refutes Plagiarism Claim, Disses Satriani in Court, Yahoo News, 4/7/09

Yahoo News: Coldplay Refutes Plagiarism Claim, Disses Satriani in Court:

"In court papers filed in Los Angeles Monday, Coldplay responded to Satriani's copyright-infringement claim, saying the 52-year-old guitarist's song "lacks originality" and therefore was in no position to receive copyright protection.

Furthermore, the British rockers' attorneys claimed that any similarity was so minimal that it did not warrant the legal action.

Back in December, Satriani claimed the group, who incidentally won the Grammy for Song of the Year for the in-question tune, had repurposed "substantial" portions of his song for their hit."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/eonline/20090407/en_music_eo/108054

Digital Piracy Spreads, and Defies a Fix; The New York Times, 4/6/09

Via The New York Times: Digital Piracy Spreads, and Defies a Fix:

"Less than a week after a pirated copy of the unreleased movie “X-Men Origins: Wolverine” popped up on the Internet, federal legislators and entertainment executives presented an extraordinarily bleak picture of the damage digital piracy can inflict, and the grim prospects for limiting it.

At a Monday morning Congressional field hearing here, lawmakers and executives both described a deteriorating situation in which $20 billion annually in copyrighted movies, music and other entertainment are being lost to global piracy networks that are tolerated or encouraged by countries like China, Russia, India and — in a case that drew special attention — Canada."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/07/business/media/07piracy.html?_r=1&hpw

Murdoch Calls Google, Yahoo Copyright Thieves — Is He Right?; Wired.com Threat Level, 4/3/09

Via Wired.com Threat Level: Murdoch Calls Google, Yahoo Copyright Thieves — Is He Right?:

"But whether search-engine news aggregation is theft or a protected fair use under copyright law is unclear, even as Google and Yahoo profit tremendously from linking to news...

Better yet, if Murdoch and Zell are so set on monetizing their web content, they should sue the search engines and claim copyright violations in a bid to get the engines to pay for the content.
The outcome of such a lawsuit is far from clear.

It's unsettled whether search engines have a valid fair use claim under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The news headlines are copied verbatim, as are some of the snippets that go along.

Fred von Lohmann of the Electronic Frontier Foundation points out that "There's not a rock-solid ruling on the question.""

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/04/murdoch-says-go.html

Fox Censors News Amid 'X-Men' Piracy Imbroglio -- Reporter in Hot Water, Wired.com Threat Level, 4/6/09

Via Wired.com Threat Level: Fox Censors News Amid 'X-Men' Piracy Imbroglio -- Reporter in Hot Water:

"Fox News, owned by News Corp., announced Sunday it had "terminated" the popular freelance writer because he wrote a review of a pirated copy of the flick that began making the rounds on BitTorrent sites lasts week. The firing, which is now in dispute, came days after News Corp. owner Rupert Murdoch called Yahoo and Google copyright thieves.

The X-Men review has also been removed from the site. (Copies of the review are linked here.)"

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/04/fox-censors-new.html

Roger Friedman's Leaked "Wolverine" Review Gets Him In Trouble With Fox News, News Corp; Huffington Post, 4/5/09

Via Huffington Post: Roger Friedman's Leaked "Wolverine" Review Gets Him In Trouble With Fox News, News Corp:

"Friedman's FoxNews.com column Thursday — since deleted — was a review of "Wolverine" that studio bosses viewed as an implicit endorsement of movie piracy, according to Deadline Hollywood Daily's Nikki Finke.

In the column, Friedman marveled at the ease of viewing a pirated movie: "It took really less than seconds to start playing it all right onto my computer," he wrote.

A News Corp statement Sunday (below) indicated that he had been "promptly terminated," which Friedman denied to ABCNews.com...

News Corp statement:
"Roger Friedman's views in no way reflect the views of News Corporation. We, along with 20th Century Fox Film Corporation, have been a consistent leader in the fight against piracy and have zero tolerance for any action that encourages and promotes piracy. When we advised Fox News of the facts they took immediate action, removed the post, and promptly terminated Mr. Friedman.""

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/05/roger-friedman-fired-by-f_n_183293.html

Librarian Opposes Google's Library Fees, NPR's All Things Considered, 2/21/09

Podcast via NPR's All Things Considered; Librarian Opposes Google's Library Fees [4 min. 29 sec.]:

"Google wants to give you access to its huge database of scanned, out-of-print books, but the company is going to charge for it. Robert Darnton, head librarian at Harvard University, says the deal violates a basic American principle — that knowledge should be free and accessible to all."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=100969810

Google’s Plan for Out-of-Print Books Is Challenged, The New York Times, 4/3/09

The New York Times; Google’s Plan for Out-of-Print Books Is Challenged:

"The dusty stacks of the nation’s great university and research libraries are full of orphans — books that the author and publisher have essentially abandoned. They are out of print, and while they remain under copyright, the rights holders are unknown or cannot be found.

Now millions of orphan books may get a new legal guardian. Google has been scanning the pages of those books and others as part of its plan to bring a digital library and bookstore, unprecedented in scope, to computer screens across the United States.

But a growing chorus is complaining that a far-reaching settlement of a suit brought against Google by publishers and authors is about to grant the company too much power over orphan works...

The settlement, “takes the vast bulk of books that are in research libraries and makes them into a single database that is the property of Google,” said Robert Darnton, head of the Harvard University library system. “Google will be a monopoly.”...

Most of the critics, which include copyright specialists, antitrust scholars and some librarians, agree that the public will benefit...

“They are doing an end run around the legislative process,” said Brewster Kahle, founder of the Open Content Alliance, which is working to build a digital library with few restrictions.

Opposition to the 134-page agreement, which the parties announced in October, has been building slowly as its implications have become clearer. Groups that plan to raise concerns with the court include the American Library Association, the Institute for Information Law and Policy at New York Law School and a group of lawyers led by Prof. Charles R. Nesson of Harvard Law School. It is not clear that any group will oppose the settlement outright.

These critics say the settlement, which is subject to court approval, will give Google virtually exclusive rights to publish the books online and to profit from them. Some academics and public interest groups plan to file legal briefs objecting to this and other parts of the settlement in coming weeks, before a review by a federal judge in June...

The settlement, which covers all books protected by copyright in the United States, allows Google to vastly expand what it can do with digital copies of books, whether they are orphans or not."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/04/technology/internet/04books.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=google%20book&st=cse

FBI called in over Wolverine leak, BBC News, 4/3/09

Via BBC News; FBI called in over Wolverine leak:

"The Hugh Jackman film was downloaded an estimated 100,000 times from file-sharing websites on Tuesday.

20th Century Fox confirmed the copy had now been removed and the FBI informed.

The studio behind Wolverine stated: "The source of the initial leak and any subsequent postings will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law."

"The courts have handed down significant criminal sentences for such acts" the studio noted...

Fox called the leaked movie a "stolen, incomplete and early version"...

The studio added that because their content is forensically marked they should be able to trace the person who uploaded it."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7978379.stm

IPod: Gift 'Fit For A Queen' Might Violate Copyright Law, Online Media Daily, 4/6/09

Via Online Media Daily; IPod: Gift 'Fit For A Queen' Might Violate Copyright Law:

"This week, President Barack Obama gave the Queen of England an iPod preloaded with 40 tracks from Broadway shows. Did doing so violate the copyright law?

Fred von Lohmann at the Electronic Frontier Foundation says the answer might be yes...

Lohmann's point isn't that Obama is potentially a scofflaw, but that the law needs to be changed. As he put it: "You know your copyright laws are broken when there is no easy answer to this question."

Law professor Eric Goldman at Santa Clara University agreed. "It's a neat little question. Can you give a gift of an iPod preloaded with music," he told Online Media Daily. "The answer should be, 'Of course he can.' The fact that it's cloudy at all is, I think, really damning about the state of copyright law.""

http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=103489

Law School To Intervene In Google Book Settlement, Online Media Daily, 4/3/09

Via Online Media Daily: Law School To Intervene In Google Book Settlement:

"A federal judge will allow New York Law School to argue that a proposed settlement of a class-action lawsuit about Google Book Search should be delayed pending further review.

The school's Institute for Information Law & Policy intends to argue that federal antitrust authorities should weigh in on the case before the court decides whether to approve the settlement. U.S. District Court Judge Denny Chin ruled Wednesday that the policy center can file a friend-of-the-court brief...

James Grimmelmann, the law school associate professor behind the initiative, said his main concern about the settlement stems from "orphan works" -- material under copyright, but whose owners can't be found.

Google foe Microsoft has agreed to contribute $50,000 to New York Law School to help fund a host of projects related to the book search settlement, including the friend-of-the-court brief, a symposium, and three white papers.

Grimmelmann said Microsoft will have no influence over the project, and his written proposal seeking funding from the software giant also spelled out that the work will be independent. "

http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=103393

Wolverine Film Leaked on the Internet, ComicBookResources.com, 4/1/09

Via ComicBookResources.com: Wolverine Film Leaked on the Internet:

"Word spread last night over Twitter and other social networking sites that "X-Men Origins: Wolverine," the hotly anticipated 20th Century Fox film based on Marvel Comics' X-Men characters, had been leaked to the internet for illegal dissemination. Directed by Gavin Hood and starring Hugh Jackman, the film is not due to be released until May 1.

As of this writing, a DVD-quality workprint version of the film is available on numerous file-sharing websites, with hundreds of thousands of users illegally downloading the various BitTorrent files. This version of the film is missing completed special effects shots and most likely other material that will be in the final version of the film, but as a consequence of the leak, early, spoiler-filled reviews have been posted across the Web.

Naturally, security questions are at the top of everyone's list. Who leaked the film, and how?"

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=20635

Experts advise citizen journalists on copyright law, Digital Journal, 3/22/09

Via Digital Journal, By David Silverberg: Experts advise citizen journalists on copyright law:

"Media law can be confusing. Even for traditional print reporters, decoding the difference between libel and slander requires patience and education. And when it comes to online citizen reporting, the blurry distinction between what is legal to upload becomes even more paramount.

To help Digital Journalists define fair use and give tips on what to "borrow" from the Web, Digital Journal spoke to David Ardia, co-founder of the Citizen Media Law Project at Harvard University's Berkman Centre. We also spoke to Canadian lawyer and professor Michael Geist to help Canadians understand the legal implications of their citizen media journalism, and why websites aren't responsible for what their users post."

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/269368

Nigeria: Can NCC's New Copyright Enforcement Tactics Tame Piracy?, allAfrica.com, 3/18/09

Via allAfrica.com: Nigeria: Can NCC's New Copyright Enforcement Tactics Tame Piracy?:

"FOR the past twenty years, the Nigerian Copyright Commission, NCC, has been on the crusade of ridding the economy of the scourge of piracy.

The cankerworm which piracy turned out to be in the fabrics of the economies of musical, film producers and book publishers among other intellectual property owners is on daily basis producing serious headache.""

http://allafrica.com/stories/200903180202.html

Educational fair use: a provocation, Collectanea Blog with Peter Jaszi, 3/30/09

Via Collectanea Blog with Peter Jaszi: Educational fair use: a provocation:

"Let me make two modest suggestions:

1. First, it's important that educators refrain from claiming too much under the heading of fair use--and, in particular, that they avoid the simple (and erroneous) proposition that merely because a use is educational, it is definitionally fair...

2. Second, it is crucial to develop the arguments for treating various kinds of educational use as "transformative." Like it or not, this is the current mantra of fair use jurisprudence, and educators need to recognize this jurisprudential fact and respond accordingly. They need to generate more and better explanations (the fair use code for media literary, referenced above, being one example), of how educational uses don't just repeat quoted material for its original purposes, but both repurpose that material and add value to it."

http://chaucer.umuc.edu/blogcip/collectanea/

AT&T Learns From Mom in Fighting File Sharing, The New York Times, 3/26/09

Via The New York Times: AT&T Learns From Mom in Fighting File Sharing:

"For customers who continue to share files, the e-mail messages became tougher. Eventually, repeat offenders received certified letters. This repeated nagging did get most of the people who continued to share files after the first notice to stop.

“Then you are down to a handful of people who don’t care, who are 24/7 engaged in copyright theft,” he said. “At that point it is up to the copyright owner to determine the next steps.”

AT&T, however, did not and does not plan to take any action on its own against those customers, like canceling their service, even though they ignored repeated warnings.

“We are not under any circumstances going to suspend or terminate any customer’s service as a result of a third-party allegation unless they have a court order,” Mr. Cicconi said. “The copyright owner has legal rights, and we are not going to be the agent to enforce their rights.”"

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/26/att-learns-from-mom-in-fighting-file-sharing/

Public-Domain Status of Early Sound Recordings Delayed Until 2067 According to Library Report, Library of Congress, 3/30/09

Via Library of Congress: Public-Domain Status of Early Sound Recordings Delayed Until 2067 According to Library Report:

"Sound recordings were not protected by federal copyright law until 1972. A Library of Congress report indicates that the miscellany of state laws protecting pre-1972 sound recordings will extend copyright protection until 2067, creating a situation where some recordings dating to the 19th century are not available in public domain.

The Library announced today the completion of a commissioned report that examines copyright issues associated with unpublished sound recordings. This new report from the Library of Congress and the Council on Library and Information Resources addresses the question of what libraries and archives are legally empowered to do, under current laws, to preserve and make accessible for research their holdings of unpublished sound recordings made before 1972.

The report, "Copyright and Related Issues Relevant to Digital Preservation and Dissemination of Unpublished Pre-1972 Sound Recordings by Libraries and Archives’ is one of a series of studies undertaken by the National Recording Preservation Board (NRPB), under the auspices of the Library of Congress. It was written by June Besek, executive director of the Kernochan Center for Law, Media and the Arts at Columbia University. The report is available free of charge at http://www.loc.gov/global/disclaimer.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.clir.org%2Fpubs%2Fabstract%2Fpub144abst.html."

http://www.loc.gov/today/pr/2009/09-060.html

Publishers Face Pressure From Libraries to Freeze Prices and Cut Deals, Chronicle of Higher Education, 3/27/09

Via Chronicle of Higher Education: Publishers Face Pressure From Libraries to Freeze Prices and Cut Deals:

"A price increase of about 5 percent a year has been the industry standard, according to Mr. Price, but Oxford has not yet announced its fee structures for 2009-10. "We're waiting for pricing decisions to be made," he said. "The question is, Do you raise prices in a year like this?"

Now more than ever, publishers feel they must walk a fine line. "We want to make sure we're not undervaluing our product, but we don't want to be seen as harsh," Mr. Price explained. "We're trying to be mindful of tough times."

He has heard from colleagues in the business that some publishers are likely to hold prices flat in response to the economic downturn, or even lower their prices...

Even consortia have had to adjust their strategies. It might be a stretch to call this a silver lining, but members of Mr. Doyle's consortium have been working to make the most of their collective resources. For instance, the University of Oregon and Oregon State University have talked about coordinating database cuts so that they don't both end up axing the same useful resource. "When things get tight," Mr. Doyle said, "you have to think about doing things a little differently.""

http://chronicle.com/free/v55/i29/29a01301.htm

Remixing YouTube, One Video At A Time, NPR's All Things Considered, 3/16/09

Via NPR's All Things Considered: Remixing YouTube, One Video At A Time:

"The latest viral video doesn't just come from YouTube — it's a remix of it. Amateur musicians with video cameras and homemade gadgets are all the playthings of an Israel-based musician and producer named Kutiman, who blends their sounds and images into unique songs. To date, his videos have accumulated more than 3 million views and climbing.

In an interview with Melissa Block, Kutiman says he was searching for guitar licks on YouTube when he came across a drummer explaining a funky groove. It inspired a slew of mash-ups."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=101959636

REMIX: buy the remix, Lessig Blog, 3/11/09

Via Lessig Blog: REMIX: buy the remix:

"This video [from ThruYou music album by Ophir Kutiel AKA Kutiman] is Jefferson's Moose. If you come to the Net armed with the idea that the old system of copyright is going to work just fine here, this more than anything is going to get you to recognize: you need some new ideas."

http://www.lessig.org/blog/2009/03/remix_buy_the_remix.html

Kutiman's ThruYou Mashup Turns YouTube Into Funk Machine, Wired.com, 3/25/09

Via Wired.com: Kutiman's ThruYou Mashup Turns YouTube Into Funk Machine:

"Five years ago he'd never heard of the "godfather of soul," James Brown. Now an Israeli mashup artist is basking in the spotlight after making the funkiest tracks on the internet, using YouTube clips of musicians who've never met each other.

Earlier this month, Ophir Kutiel, aka Kutiman, released seven videos made by mixing and matching found footage for his project, called ThruYou. The clever musical mashups have since been viewed more than a million times, and Kutiman is basking in the glow of raves from MySpace commenters and mainstream media alike...

Thanks mostly to Twitter, it wasn't long until Kutiman had logged more than 1.5 million views on YouTube. Praise came from outlets as varied as National Public Radio and Gawker, and Kutiman drew plaudits from open source advocates like Lawrence Lessig, who called ThruYou a nail in the coffin of copyright as we know it."

http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2009/03/kutimans-pionee.html

Remixing Is Creating And Original -- It's Not Just Derivative Copying, TechDirt.com , 3/27/09

Via TechDirt.com: Remixing Is Creating And Original -- It's Not Just Derivative Copying:

"At the beginning of the month we were one of the first to write about the amazing Thru-You "album" created by a DJ named Kutiman, who took individual sounds off of YouTube and mixed them into a full album. I've always been a believer in the concept that remixing something is a creative endeavor in its own right, but I'd never seen the point driven home quite as clearly as in this album...

The idea that what he's done is almost certainly illegal and copyright infringement (he seems incredulous at the idea) should be a clear indication that something is wrong with the current copyright regime."

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090327/1611474282.shtml

At Columbia Conference, Harvard’s Darnton Asks: Is Google the Elsevier of the Future?, Library Journal, 3/18/09

Via Library Journal: At Columbia Conference, Harvard’s Darnton Asks: Is Google the Elsevier of the Future?:

"Is the public’s interest in books at risk with the pending Google Book Search Settlement? That was one of many issues addressed at an all-day conference on the settlement, held on March 13 at Columbia University.

In the final panel of the day, which addressed public interest issues, Google’s Alexander Macgillivray, associate general counsel for products and intellectual property, responded a bit pugnaciously...He suggested that “a special type of researcher,” such as automated translation experts, would also benefit enormously from the database, that “the long term effects of those researchers having access to this corpus” could even lead “to more peace in the world,” and that the database would add significantly to access to books by disabled people, citing an endorsement from the National Federation of the Blind...

“The downside has to do with the danger of monopoly,” he [Harvard University librarian Robert Darnton] said, adding that, while not all monopolies are bad, the danger comes in the abuse of power, notably via monopoly pricing. “So we have a situation where Google can really ratchet up prices, and that’s what really worries me,” he said. “There’s no real authority to enforce fair pricing… I’m worried that Google will be the Elsevier of the future, but magnified by a hundred times.” Without a mechanism to police pricing, he warned, “it’s going to ruin libraries.”...He called the provision of one terminal in public libraries “one of the weakest provisions,” and predicted chaos in a large urban public library. Google, meanwhile, has said it would consider more than one terminal in larger libraries.

Another solution?
Is Congressional intervention on the public’s behalf a possibility? Does the settlement, for example, make it harder, or perhaps easier to go to Congress for authorization to create a national digital library? “I hate to say this, I don’t think it’s possible,” Darnton said. “We’ve got this settlement, and if it’s not modified now, it’s going to shape the world of digital information for the near future, maybe the far future.”"

http://www.libraryjournal.com/CA6645344.html

Register of Copyrights Not Asked by Congress To Weigh in on Google Book Search?, Library Journal, 3/20/09

Via Library Journal: Register of Copyrights Not Asked by Congress To Weigh in on Google Book Search?:

"Out of last Friday's all-day Columbia University conference on Google Book Search came this interesting little tidbit: Register of Copyrights Mary Beth Peters had recommended against the Library of Congress participating in Google’s initial Library Partners program, because she wasn’t sure that Google’s indexing of copyrighted books was a fair use.

That in and of itself is not a shocker—a lot of experts are still torn over whether the plan was indeed a fair use. But as Cornell University’s Peter Hirtle noted, the real surprise is that Congress, well, just didn’t seem to care about the program.

“Most disturbing of all was Peters’s admission that not one member of Congress has asked the Copyright Office to comment on the settlement," Hirtle blogged “even though it may fundamentally change how Americans can access and use copyrighted information.”

Certainly, that insight has to make one wonder how much Congress cares about the promotion of progress at the bedrock of copyright law. Last year, Congress failed to pass orphan works legislation but passed a draconian bill stiffening infringement penalties. And while sitting out the potentially momentous discussion over copyright as raised by Google Book Search, Congress is agian considering the Fair Copyright in Research Works Act—controversial legislation that would bar public access to research funded by taxpayers, and would undo the NIH’s access policy, enacted last year.

Notably, Peters was also not asked to testify at a hearing on the Fair Copyright in Research Works Act during a congressional hearing last year—but, curiously, a former register of copyright, Ralph Oman was asked, and did testify. Oman told lawmakers that the public access policies, like the NIH’s, would harm publishers and gut copyright."

http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6645344.html