Mike Masnick, TechDirt; Law Professor (?!?) Claims Copyright Infringement Because Blog Uses Faculty Photo In Blog Post:
"Just because you're a law professor, it doesn't mean you really understand the law, apparently. Eric Goldman (a law professor who does understand the law) alerts us to a bizarre lawsuit involving University of Miami law professor D. Marvin Jones, who was the subject of a series of blog posts on the popular law blog, AboveTheLaw, concerning a 2007 attempt where Jones was detained by police for allegedly soliciting a prostitute -- something he vehemently claims was not true, and authorities did, in fact, drop the charges and expunge the record. Jones makes a few different claims against ATL, all of which seem frivolous and unlikely to stand, but the most ridiculous of all is the claim that his copyright was violated by ATL using his faculty photo."
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091104/0139026792.shtml
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Australian Radio Program On 'Piracy' What 60 Minutes Should Have Done; TechDirt, 11/4/09
Mike Masnick, TechDirt; Australian Radio Program On 'Piracy' What 60 Minutes Should Have Done:
"On Monday, we wrote about that that ridiculous attempt by 60 Minutes to do a story about movie piracy that was basically one long press release for the MPAA's position. Facts weren't checked, and the reporter, Leslie Stahl, didn't bother to push back on a single claim made by any of the (all industry insider) guests. However, Boing Boing points us to a "radio documentary" on piracy that was done on Australian radio the very same day as the 60 Minutes episode aired. You may notice a major difference in that the Australian radio folks actually looked at the facts, invited on people who could refute industry claims, and actually pushed back on claims by the industry".
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091103/0303386776.shtml
"On Monday, we wrote about that that ridiculous attempt by 60 Minutes to do a story about movie piracy that was basically one long press release for the MPAA's position. Facts weren't checked, and the reporter, Leslie Stahl, didn't bother to push back on a single claim made by any of the (all industry insider) guests. However, Boing Boing points us to a "radio documentary" on piracy that was done on Australian radio the very same day as the 60 Minutes episode aired. You may notice a major difference in that the Australian radio folks actually looked at the facts, invited on people who could refute industry claims, and actually pushed back on claims by the industry".
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091103/0303386776.shtml
Is There "Hope" for Shepard Fairey?; Slate, 10/21/09
Tim Wu, Slate; Is There "Hope" for Shepard Fairey? :
How does fair-use law work, anyway?
"Shepard Fairey may have hoped to teach something new about art and copyright with his iconic "Hope" poster of Barack Obama. Instead, he is accused of lying about which Associated Press photo he used. (He says he made a mistake.) But if Fairey's lying has probably made a hash of his case and lost him a lawyer, it has also raised that pesky question yet again: Just what is fair use? Was it legal for Fairey to take an AP photo and turn it into this piece of artwork?
Copyright lawyers, when asked about fair use, love to emphasize its complexity and opacity. I won't deny that fair use can be a little dense, yet I firmly believe the basics can be well-understood. My project is to demystify: a few details may be lost, but here goes."
http://www.slate.com/id/2233152/
How does fair-use law work, anyway?
"Shepard Fairey may have hoped to teach something new about art and copyright with his iconic "Hope" poster of Barack Obama. Instead, he is accused of lying about which Associated Press photo he used. (He says he made a mistake.) But if Fairey's lying has probably made a hash of his case and lost him a lawyer, it has also raised that pesky question yet again: Just what is fair use? Was it legal for Fairey to take an AP photo and turn it into this piece of artwork?
Copyright lawyers, when asked about fair use, love to emphasize its complexity and opacity. I won't deny that fair use can be a little dense, yet I firmly believe the basics can be well-understood. My project is to demystify: a few details may be lost, but here goes."
http://www.slate.com/id/2233152/
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Podcast: The role of fair use in a time of change; Lawrence Lessig, via Channels.com, 10/4/09
Podcast: [66 min. 22 sec.] The role of "fair use" in a time of change; Lawrence Lessig, speaking in Kyoto, Japan; Channels.com:
http://www.channels.com/episodes/show/7183210/The-role-of-fair-use-in-a-time-of-CHANGE#/episodes/show/7183210/The-role-of-fair-use-in-a-time-of-CHANGE
http://www.channels.com/episodes/show/7183210/The-role-of-fair-use-in-a-time-of-CHANGE#/episodes/show/7183210/The-role-of-fair-use-in-a-time-of-CHANGE
60 Minutes Puts Forth Laughable, Factually Incorrect MPAA Propaganda On Movie Piracy; TechDirt, 11/2/09
Mike Masnick, TechDirt; 60 Minutes Puts Forth Laughable, Factually Incorrect MPAA Propaganda On Movie Piracy:
"31 years ago, in 1978, the television program 60 Minutes put on an episode about the awful threat of "video piracy" to the movie industry. Featuring the MPAA's Jack Valenti, the episode focused on how the VCR was going to destroy the movie business because anyone could copy and watch a movie in the privacy of their own home. Of course, in retrospect, that episode is hilariously wrong. You would think that, given how wrong they got it thirty years ago on this particular subject, 60 Minutes would be a bit more careful taking on the same subject again.
No such luck.
CBS's 60 Minutes has made itself out to be more of a laughingstock than usual when it comes to "investigative reporting," putting on an episode about "video piracy" that is basically 100% MPAA propaganda, without any fact checking or any attempt to challenge the (all MPAA connected) speakers, or to include anyone (anyone!) who would present a counterpoint. The episode is funny in that it contradicts itself at times (with no one noticing it) and gets important (and easily checked) facts wrong. And, of course, it basically mimics that old episode that history has shown to have been totally (laughably) false."
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091101/1818186751.shtml
"31 years ago, in 1978, the television program 60 Minutes put on an episode about the awful threat of "video piracy" to the movie industry. Featuring the MPAA's Jack Valenti, the episode focused on how the VCR was going to destroy the movie business because anyone could copy and watch a movie in the privacy of their own home. Of course, in retrospect, that episode is hilariously wrong. You would think that, given how wrong they got it thirty years ago on this particular subject, 60 Minutes would be a bit more careful taking on the same subject again.
No such luck.
CBS's 60 Minutes has made itself out to be more of a laughingstock than usual when it comes to "investigative reporting," putting on an episode about "video piracy" that is basically 100% MPAA propaganda, without any fact checking or any attempt to challenge the (all MPAA connected) speakers, or to include anyone (anyone!) who would present a counterpoint. The episode is funny in that it contradicts itself at times (with no one noticing it) and gets important (and easily checked) facts wrong. And, of course, it basically mimics that old episode that history has shown to have been totally (laughably) false."
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091101/1818186751.shtml
Monday, November 2, 2009
Reading from the web: The joy of Google Books; Gleaner (Jamaica, West Indes), 11/1/09
Gleaner (Jamaica, West Indes); Reading from the web: The joy of Google Books:
"Google Books, the online phenomenon that has become something of a godsend to book addicts the world over is quickly gaining popularity among Jamaican readers.
Google Books is the creation of popular Web search engine, Google. It allows access to thousands of books, some of which can be downloaded and read in their entirety. Extensive sections of other books are available for browsing. You can read several pages of these book and even see photos and graphics.
Lots of Jamaicans have been turning to the site recently and it has become a favourite among tech-savvy readers who get a thrill from having access to so many books without having to pay a cent. There are lots of books on Jamaica and the history of the island on the Website and you can browse and learn to your heart's content."
http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20091101/arts/arts2.html
"Google Books, the online phenomenon that has become something of a godsend to book addicts the world over is quickly gaining popularity among Jamaican readers.
Google Books is the creation of popular Web search engine, Google. It allows access to thousands of books, some of which can be downloaded and read in their entirety. Extensive sections of other books are available for browsing. You can read several pages of these book and even see photos and graphics.
Lots of Jamaicans have been turning to the site recently and it has become a favourite among tech-savvy readers who get a thrill from having access to so many books without having to pay a cent. There are lots of books on Jamaica and the history of the island on the Website and you can browse and learn to your heart's content."
http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20091101/arts/arts2.html
Desire to scan old books has critics casting Google as Goliath; San Jose Mercury News, 11/1/09
Mike Swift, San Jose Mercury News; Desire to scan old books has critics casting Google as Goliath:
"Company co-founder Sergey Brin has said repeatedly in recent weeks that Google is primarily acting with the public good in mind to preserve the world's cultural heritage in old books.
"I've been surprised at the level of controversy there," Brin said at a recent Internet conference in San Francisco. "Because digitalizing the world's books to make them available, there's been nobody else who's attempted it at our scale."
Federal regulators didn't see it that way, with the U.S. Department of Justice asking a federal judge this fall to reject the proposed class action settlement. Department officials say Google's plans would potentially violate federal antitrust laws.
The issue has clearly become more prominent because of Google's vast ambitions — its dominant search index to more than a trillion of web pages, and its march into digital maps, mobile phones, online video and other sectors of the Internet.
The controversy has shown Google is not that different from other profit-driven corporations, said Siva Vaidhyanathan, a professor of media studies and law at the University of Virginia.
"It really took something this big and grand to show that Google does have problems, and does have vulnerabilities, and can be exploitative," Vaidhyanathan said. "I'm as surprised as anybody that this turned out to be the moment in which Google's true nature came to light."
Google says negotiations are on track to have a revamped proposal ready before the Nov. 9 court deadline. While the search giant also ran afoul of the Justice Department last year over a proposed advertising partnership with Yahoo, even Google acknowledges public scrutiny has grown.
"It's absolutely partially about Google's size," said Daniel Clancy, engineering director of Google Book Search and a lead negotiator with authors and publishers. "If this settlement came out three years ago, what would have been in the press would be very different."
After more than 500 years where most human knowledge was stored in books, the controversy about digital books also "is a big Rorschach test, if you will, for the concerns people have about a digital future," Clancy said.
Google has insisted that its digital books plans, however they ultimately emerge from the ongoing talks, will leave room for competitors.
In an op-ed article in The New York Times, Brin said Google hoped "to unlock the wisdom held in the enormous number of out-of-print books, while fairly compensating the rights holders."
Brin did not even mention the Justice Department's concerns about competitive disadvantage in the article.
The department's filing in the case argues that "other digital distributors may be effectively precluded from competing with Google in the sale of digital library products and other derivative products to come."
For opponents like Pam Samuelson, a copyright expert at the University of California, Berkeley, who helped organize opposition to the digital books plan, Brin's omissions rankle.
"To me that sounds like they don't care what the Department of Justice thinks. It sounds a little like hubris to me," Samuelson said. "Google has done a great job of shining the spotlight on things about the settlement that people would find attractive, but they don't tell you some of the stuff that would be most worrisome about it.""
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_13680481
"Company co-founder Sergey Brin has said repeatedly in recent weeks that Google is primarily acting with the public good in mind to preserve the world's cultural heritage in old books.
"I've been surprised at the level of controversy there," Brin said at a recent Internet conference in San Francisco. "Because digitalizing the world's books to make them available, there's been nobody else who's attempted it at our scale."
Federal regulators didn't see it that way, with the U.S. Department of Justice asking a federal judge this fall to reject the proposed class action settlement. Department officials say Google's plans would potentially violate federal antitrust laws.
The issue has clearly become more prominent because of Google's vast ambitions — its dominant search index to more than a trillion of web pages, and its march into digital maps, mobile phones, online video and other sectors of the Internet.
The controversy has shown Google is not that different from other profit-driven corporations, said Siva Vaidhyanathan, a professor of media studies and law at the University of Virginia.
"It really took something this big and grand to show that Google does have problems, and does have vulnerabilities, and can be exploitative," Vaidhyanathan said. "I'm as surprised as anybody that this turned out to be the moment in which Google's true nature came to light."
Google says negotiations are on track to have a revamped proposal ready before the Nov. 9 court deadline. While the search giant also ran afoul of the Justice Department last year over a proposed advertising partnership with Yahoo, even Google acknowledges public scrutiny has grown.
"It's absolutely partially about Google's size," said Daniel Clancy, engineering director of Google Book Search and a lead negotiator with authors and publishers. "If this settlement came out three years ago, what would have been in the press would be very different."
After more than 500 years where most human knowledge was stored in books, the controversy about digital books also "is a big Rorschach test, if you will, for the concerns people have about a digital future," Clancy said.
Google has insisted that its digital books plans, however they ultimately emerge from the ongoing talks, will leave room for competitors.
In an op-ed article in The New York Times, Brin said Google hoped "to unlock the wisdom held in the enormous number of out-of-print books, while fairly compensating the rights holders."
Brin did not even mention the Justice Department's concerns about competitive disadvantage in the article.
The department's filing in the case argues that "other digital distributors may be effectively precluded from competing with Google in the sale of digital library products and other derivative products to come."
For opponents like Pam Samuelson, a copyright expert at the University of California, Berkeley, who helped organize opposition to the digital books plan, Brin's omissions rankle.
"To me that sounds like they don't care what the Department of Justice thinks. It sounds a little like hubris to me," Samuelson said. "Google has done a great job of shining the spotlight on things about the settlement that people would find attractive, but they don't tell you some of the stuff that would be most worrisome about it.""
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_13680481
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Chris Christie Rips Off Monty Python, Risks Copyright Infringement; Huffington Post, 11/1/09
Martin Lewis, Huffington Post; Chris Christie Rips Off Monty Python, Risks Copyright Infringement:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/martin-lewis/chris-christie-rips-off-m_b_341598.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/martin-lewis/chris-christie-rips-off-m_b_341598.html
Podcast: The Movie Pirates; 60 Minutes, 11/1/09
Podcast: [12 min. 31 sec.]; 60 Minutes; The Movie Pirates:
"They are the bane of Hollywood: criminals who copy films and distribute them illegally on the Internet, costing Hollywood billions in lost revenue. Lesley Stahl reports."
http://www.cbs.com/primetime/60_minutes/video/?pid=NceD3u9gWRu6gDUxN5DyCpDJBOj_RjhA
"They are the bane of Hollywood: criminals who copy films and distribute them illegally on the Internet, costing Hollywood billions in lost revenue. Lesley Stahl reports."
http://www.cbs.com/primetime/60_minutes/video/?pid=NceD3u9gWRu6gDUxN5DyCpDJBOj_RjhA
Illegal downloaders 'spend the most on music', says poll; Independent, 11/1/09
Rachel Shields, Independent; Illegal downloaders 'spend the most on music', says poll:
Crackdown on music piracy could further harm ailing industry
"People who illegally download music from the internet also spend more money on music than anyone else, according to a new study. The survey, published today, found that those who admit illegally downloading music spent an average of £77 a year on music – £33 more than those who claim that they never download music dishonestly.
The findings suggest that plans by the Secretary of State for Business, Peter Mandelson, to crack down on illegal downloaders by threatening to cut their internet connections with a "three strikes and you're out" rule could harm the music industry by punishing its core customers.
An estimated seven million UK users download files illegally every year. The record industry's trade association, the British Phonographic Industry (BPI), believes this copyright infringement will cost the industry £200m this year.
The poll, which surveyed 1,000 16- to 50-year-olds with internet access, found that one in 10 people admit to downloading music illegally.
"The latest approach from the Government will not help prop up an ailing music industry. Politicians and music companies need to recognise that the nature of music consumption has changed, and consumers are demanding lower prices and easier access," said Peter Bradwell, from the think-tank Demos, which commissioned the new poll conducted by Ipsos Mori.
However, music industry figures insist the figures offer a skewed picture. The poll suggested the Government's plan to disconnect illegal downloaders if they ignore official warning letters could deter people from internet piracy, with 61 per cent of illegal downloaders surveyed admitting they would be put off downloading music illegally by the threat of having their internet service cut off for a month.
"The people who file-share are the ones who are interested in music," said Mark Mulligan of Forrester Research. "They use file-sharing as a discovery mechanism. We have a generation of young people who don't have any concept of music as a paid-for commodity," he continued. "You need to have it at a price point you won't notice."
The Digital Economy Bill, which will become law next April, sets out new measures to crack down on internet piracy. But these have generated criticism from internet service providers, who say they will be difficult to enforce.
Artists are also divided over the issue, with Lily Allen and James Blunt recently supporting the Government's stance, while the Latin pop star Shakira argues that illegal file sharing brings her closer to her fans.
This year Virgin Media and Universal Music plan to launch the first music subscription service allowing customers to download and keep unlimited tracks from Universal's catalogue for a fee of around £15."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/illegal-downloaders-spend-the-most-on-music-says-poll-1812776.html
Crackdown on music piracy could further harm ailing industry
"People who illegally download music from the internet also spend more money on music than anyone else, according to a new study. The survey, published today, found that those who admit illegally downloading music spent an average of £77 a year on music – £33 more than those who claim that they never download music dishonestly.
The findings suggest that plans by the Secretary of State for Business, Peter Mandelson, to crack down on illegal downloaders by threatening to cut their internet connections with a "three strikes and you're out" rule could harm the music industry by punishing its core customers.
An estimated seven million UK users download files illegally every year. The record industry's trade association, the British Phonographic Industry (BPI), believes this copyright infringement will cost the industry £200m this year.
The poll, which surveyed 1,000 16- to 50-year-olds with internet access, found that one in 10 people admit to downloading music illegally.
"The latest approach from the Government will not help prop up an ailing music industry. Politicians and music companies need to recognise that the nature of music consumption has changed, and consumers are demanding lower prices and easier access," said Peter Bradwell, from the think-tank Demos, which commissioned the new poll conducted by Ipsos Mori.
However, music industry figures insist the figures offer a skewed picture. The poll suggested the Government's plan to disconnect illegal downloaders if they ignore official warning letters could deter people from internet piracy, with 61 per cent of illegal downloaders surveyed admitting they would be put off downloading music illegally by the threat of having their internet service cut off for a month.
"The people who file-share are the ones who are interested in music," said Mark Mulligan of Forrester Research. "They use file-sharing as a discovery mechanism. We have a generation of young people who don't have any concept of music as a paid-for commodity," he continued. "You need to have it at a price point you won't notice."
The Digital Economy Bill, which will become law next April, sets out new measures to crack down on internet piracy. But these have generated criticism from internet service providers, who say they will be difficult to enforce.
Artists are also divided over the issue, with Lily Allen and James Blunt recently supporting the Government's stance, while the Latin pop star Shakira argues that illegal file sharing brings her closer to her fans.
This year Virgin Media and Universal Music plan to launch the first music subscription service allowing customers to download and keep unlimited tracks from Universal's catalogue for a fee of around £15."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/illegal-downloaders-spend-the-most-on-music-says-poll-1812776.html
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Lil Wayne, Birdman hit with copyright suit in NYC; AP, via Yahoo News, 10/30/09
Jennifer Peltz, AP, via Yahoo News; Lil Wayne, Birdman hit with copyright suit in NYC:
"A Florida man wants rappers Lil Wayne and Birdman to show him respect — for using his voice in an album track called just that.
Thomas Marasciullo filed a copyright infringement lawsuit Friday in a Manhattan federal court against the rappers, their record label and various music distribution outlets.
The lawsuit said Cash Money Records had him cut some "'Italian-styled' spoken word recordings" in 2006, then used them without pay or permission on "Respect" and other tracks from the rappers' joint 2006 album "Like Father, Like Son" and Birdman's 2007 "5 (Star) Stunna.""
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091031/ap_en_mu/us_people_lil_wayne
"A Florida man wants rappers Lil Wayne and Birdman to show him respect — for using his voice in an album track called just that.
Thomas Marasciullo filed a copyright infringement lawsuit Friday in a Manhattan federal court against the rappers, their record label and various music distribution outlets.
The lawsuit said Cash Money Records had him cut some "'Italian-styled' spoken word recordings" in 2006, then used them without pay or permission on "Respect" and other tracks from the rappers' joint 2006 album "Like Father, Like Son" and Birdman's 2007 "5 (Star) Stunna.""
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091031/ap_en_mu/us_people_lil_wayne
Firebowls, Copyright And Crowdfunding (Oh My); TechDirt, 10/30/09
Mike Masnick, TechDirt; Firebowls, Copyright And Crowdfunding (Oh My):
"Here's the summary of the situation:
Unger makes "firebowls" -- decorative metal bowls that you light a fire in (I had no idea such things existed).
He copyrighted the design of his firebowls.
He then discovered that Rick Wittrig was making firebowls that look remarkably similar, but are a bit cheaper.
Unger got angry and sent a cease-and-desist
Wittrig filed a lawsuit to claim that Unger's registered copyrights are not legitimate, as there shouldn't be any copyright on utilitarian objects.
Unger writes up his side of the story (small artist being ripped off!) and asks people to fund his legal defense using popular crowdfunding site Kickstarter"
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091030/0412566732.shtml
"Here's the summary of the situation:
Unger makes "firebowls" -- decorative metal bowls that you light a fire in (I had no idea such things existed).
He copyrighted the design of his firebowls.
He then discovered that Rick Wittrig was making firebowls that look remarkably similar, but are a bit cheaper.
Unger got angry and sent a cease-and-desist
Wittrig filed a lawsuit to claim that Unger's registered copyrights are not legitimate, as there shouldn't be any copyright on utilitarian objects.
Unger writes up his side of the story (small artist being ripped off!) and asks people to fund his legal defense using popular crowdfunding site Kickstarter"
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091030/0412566732.shtml
Anti-File Sharing Lobbyists/Lawyers Shove Each Other Aside To Blame P2P Rather Than Dumb Guy For Congressional Leak; TechDirt, 10/30/09
Mike Masnick, TechDirt; Anti-File Sharing Lobbyists/Lawyers Shove Each Other Aside To Blame P2P Rather Than Dumb Guy For Congressional Leak:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091030/1334356743.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091030/1334356743.shtml
Oregon Tries Claiming Copyright Over Gov't Materials Again; TechDirt, 10/30/09
Mike Masnick, TechDirt; Oregon Tries Claiming Copyright Over Gov't Materials Again:
"You may recall last year that the state of Oregon tried to claim copyright in preventing others from republishing Oregon laws. Yes, that seems incredibly counterproductive, and eventually the state backed down. However, it looks like Oregon's Attorney General is now also claiming copyright on the Attorney General's Public Record and Public Meeting Manual. Yes. A government official claiming copyright over a document on the public record. Wonderful. Carl Malamud is trying to get the Attorney General to issue an opinion that such things will not be covered by copyright. But, again, can anyone provide any good reason why any government document should be covered by copyright?"
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091030/1537066744.shtml
"You may recall last year that the state of Oregon tried to claim copyright in preventing others from republishing Oregon laws. Yes, that seems incredibly counterproductive, and eventually the state backed down. However, it looks like Oregon's Attorney General is now also claiming copyright on the Attorney General's Public Record and Public Meeting Manual. Yes. A government official claiming copyright over a document on the public record. Wonderful. Carl Malamud is trying to get the Attorney General to issue an opinion that such things will not be covered by copyright. But, again, can anyone provide any good reason why any government document should be covered by copyright?"
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091030/1537066744.shtml
Licensing Agreements Now Covering 'The Universe' And Future Media Not Yet Developed; TechDirt, 10/30/09
Mike Masnick, TechDirt; Licensing Agreements Now Covering 'The Universe' And Future Media Not Yet Developed:
"However, it looks like lawyers drafting such legal arrangements are beginning to recognize this as an issue and are trying to prepare for such eventual new media opportunities. Eric Goldman alerts us to a WSJ article, highlighting how phrases like "in all media, throughout the universe" are becoming increasingly common in licensing contract language. While some decry this as being imprecise and overly broad, I tend to fall on the other side of the fence."
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091029/0151366712.shtml
"However, it looks like lawyers drafting such legal arrangements are beginning to recognize this as an issue and are trying to prepare for such eventual new media opportunities. Eric Goldman alerts us to a WSJ article, highlighting how phrases like "in all media, throughout the universe" are becoming increasingly common in licensing contract language. While some decry this as being imprecise and overly broad, I tend to fall on the other side of the fence."
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091029/0151366712.shtml
Will Three Strikes Ever Really Get Implemented In The UK?; TechDirt, 10/30/09
Mike Masnick, TechDirt; Will Three Strikes Ever Really Get Implemented In The UK?:
"With Peter Mandelson announcing this week (as everyone expected) that he's going to introduce a proposal to kick file sharers off the internet under a "three strikes" plan, it's been amusing watching defenders of this idea try and fail to answer the question "how will this make people buy more stuff." ...
But, perhaps an even bigger question is whether or not it will ever actually get implemented in the UK."
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091030/0328096729.shtml
"With Peter Mandelson announcing this week (as everyone expected) that he's going to introduce a proposal to kick file sharers off the internet under a "three strikes" plan, it's been amusing watching defenders of this idea try and fail to answer the question "how will this make people buy more stuff." ...
But, perhaps an even bigger question is whether or not it will ever actually get implemented in the UK."
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091030/0328096729.shtml
Brooklyn Law School No Fan Of Due Process; Apparently Handing Names Over To MPAA [Updated]; TechDirt, 10/30/09
Mike Masnick, TechDirt; Brooklyn Law School No Fan Of Due Process; Apparently Handing Names Over To MPAA [Updated]:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091029/0409046717.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091029/0409046717.shtml
Vampire fever is biting hard; Sydney Morning Herald, 10/31/09
Jonathan Dart, Sydney Morning Herald; Vampire fever is biting hard:
"Hamish Fraser, a partner at Truman Hoyle law firm, warned people to not get too fired up by Halloween and start copying ideas that might belong to someone else.
It follows a case in Britain where a single mother was sent a warning letter by Warner Bros over potential copyright breaches, after she planned a Harry Potter themed dinner event.
"What probably went wrong in the United Kingdom in this case was that it might have looked, to Warner Brothers, that this woman was trying to earn money rather than having a fun night," Mr Fraser said.
"The problem is that the copyright law is what it is. If you copy the Harry Potter logo, for instance, you are almost certainly infringing copyright.''
But in a year when vampires are so popular, Mr Fraser said it will be harder for companies to suck the blood out of parties by protecting copyright - recent Twilight-themed parties have been held everywhere from Yass Valley Council Library to the Loft Bar in Darling Harbour."
http://www.smh.com.au/national/vampire-fever-is-biting-hard-20091030-hpqy.html
"Hamish Fraser, a partner at Truman Hoyle law firm, warned people to not get too fired up by Halloween and start copying ideas that might belong to someone else.
It follows a case in Britain where a single mother was sent a warning letter by Warner Bros over potential copyright breaches, after she planned a Harry Potter themed dinner event.
"What probably went wrong in the United Kingdom in this case was that it might have looked, to Warner Brothers, that this woman was trying to earn money rather than having a fun night," Mr Fraser said.
"The problem is that the copyright law is what it is. If you copy the Harry Potter logo, for instance, you are almost certainly infringing copyright.''
But in a year when vampires are so popular, Mr Fraser said it will be harder for companies to suck the blood out of parties by protecting copyright - recent Twilight-themed parties have been held everywhere from Yass Valley Council Library to the Loft Bar in Darling Harbour."
http://www.smh.com.au/national/vampire-fever-is-biting-hard-20091030-hpqy.html
Friday, October 30, 2009
MI5, an ISP lawsuit and an e-petition: More opposition to piracy cut-off plans; ZDNet, 10/30/09
Zack Whittaker, ZDNet; MI5, an ISP lawsuit and an e-petition: More opposition to piracy cut-off plans:
"There has been more controversy this week with a major Internet service provider, a petition set up to harness the power of democracy, but also the British Security Service, MI5, all opposing the cut-off laws which are being pushed through by a key figure in the British government’s cabinet."
http://blogs.zdnet.com/igeneration/?p=3187&tag=post-3168;col2
"There has been more controversy this week with a major Internet service provider, a petition set up to harness the power of democracy, but also the British Security Service, MI5, all opposing the cut-off laws which are being pushed through by a key figure in the British government’s cabinet."
http://blogs.zdnet.com/igeneration/?p=3187&tag=post-3168;col2
HP bets on paper books and magazines in digital age; San Jose Business Journal, 10/21/09
San Jose Business Journal; HP bets on paper books and magazines in digital age:
"Hewlett-Packard Co. is placing a big bet on paper magazines and paper books, even as electronic books and readers become more popular, with Barnes & Noble introducing its new Nook reader Tuesday.
HP is setting up projects to allow people to print their own magazines and to print old books that are out of copyright.
Palo Alto-based HP (NYSE: HPQ) is working with Jimmy “Jimbo” Wales, who started Wikipedia, on Mag Cloud, a service that lets people pay about 20 cents a page to create and print magazines from Wales’ for-profit Wikia business. Someone can put together content from various Wikia pages and print them out as a magazine.
People can print books if the copyright has expired using another HP service called BookPrep. To print a 250-page book will cost about $15, for example."
http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2009/10/19/daily53.html
"Hewlett-Packard Co. is placing a big bet on paper magazines and paper books, even as electronic books and readers become more popular, with Barnes & Noble introducing its new Nook reader Tuesday.
HP is setting up projects to allow people to print their own magazines and to print old books that are out of copyright.
Palo Alto-based HP (NYSE: HPQ) is working with Jimmy “Jimbo” Wales, who started Wikipedia, on Mag Cloud, a service that lets people pay about 20 cents a page to create and print magazines from Wales’ for-profit Wikia business. Someone can put together content from various Wikia pages and print them out as a magazine.
People can print books if the copyright has expired using another HP service called BookPrep. To print a 250-page book will cost about $15, for example."
http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2009/10/19/daily53.html
Yes on One Ad Rankles NPR; Maine Public Broadcasting Network, 10/21/09
Josie Huang, Maine Public Broadcasting Network; Yes on One Ad Rankles NPR:
The campaign to overturn Maine's same-sex marriage law is taking on an unlikely new adversary: National Public Radio. NPR wants the Yes on One/Stand for Marriage Maine campaign to stop airing television spots featuring audio from an NPR story because the organization does not want to be associated with a political issue. But the campaign says it is ignoring the cease-and-desist order from NPR and will keep airing the ads.
""This is a ridiculous and frivolous complaint," says Scott Fish, spokesman for the campaign to repeal the gay marriage law, reading from a prepared statement. "Stand For Marriage Maine has the absolute right to use news clips aired on NPR in our advertisement. This is a protected exercise of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and is expressly contemplated as 'fair use' in our nation's copyright laws."
"Fair use" describes a legal principle in which copyrighted materials can be used under certain conditions, such as how much of it is used, and whether it hurts the copyright holder in any way.The 30-second ad excerpts 20 seconds from a 2004 NPR story titled "Massachusetts Schools Grapple with Including Gay and Lesbian Relationships in Sex Education." The piece examined how teachers were approaching the issue of same-sex relationships following the legalization of gay marriage in Massachusetts.
Of course, fair use, is all subjective, and NPR contends that this is not a case of fair use. "We've not had a potlicial organization use our content in this manner and, frankly, violate our copyright in this manner," says Dana Davis Rehm, a senior vice president at NPR overseeing communications.
She notes that two-thirds of the ad is comprised of audio from the NPR story. She further argues that the TV spots harm the reputation of NPR. "It may give people the impression that NPR permitted the use of the content in this manner, it may give people an impression that NPR has a position on this topic, either for or against the issue being discussed."
NPR has asked the Website YouTube, and other sites that were streaming the video, to stop, which they have. But Rehm says NPR has not yet approached television stations, and is still reviewing its legal options.
NPR could seek a court injunction to completely halt the ads, but it is running out of time. Voters will be asked to decide whether to repeal the same-sex marriage law in exactly two weeks.
Al Tompkins teaches broadcast ethics at the Poynter Institute. "In the two weeks that is going to pass between now and election time, it's highly unlikely that you'd be able to get a court to do much in a way of judgement on this, so the election will be over before you get much legal help."
But David Ardia, who directs the Citizen Media Law project at Harvard University, says that NPR may still be able to have an impact with its actions. "When you're talking about a political campaign, where time is of the essense, the fact that a video has been taken down during that time period can actually have the effect the copyright holder wants."
He notes that it is standard practice for a video to stay off YouTube for at least 10 days during which the copyright holder relents or decides to pursue legal action against the user. "And when you're talking about a 10-day window and only two weeks between the take down notice and the election, that can result in the video being down for most of the relevant time period."
Meanwhile, though, the ads are still running on television."
http://www.mpbn.net/Home/tabid/36/ctl/ViewItem/mid/3478/ItemId/9474/Default.aspx
The campaign to overturn Maine's same-sex marriage law is taking on an unlikely new adversary: National Public Radio. NPR wants the Yes on One/Stand for Marriage Maine campaign to stop airing television spots featuring audio from an NPR story because the organization does not want to be associated with a political issue. But the campaign says it is ignoring the cease-and-desist order from NPR and will keep airing the ads.
""This is a ridiculous and frivolous complaint," says Scott Fish, spokesman for the campaign to repeal the gay marriage law, reading from a prepared statement. "Stand For Marriage Maine has the absolute right to use news clips aired on NPR in our advertisement. This is a protected exercise of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and is expressly contemplated as 'fair use' in our nation's copyright laws."
"Fair use" describes a legal principle in which copyrighted materials can be used under certain conditions, such as how much of it is used, and whether it hurts the copyright holder in any way.The 30-second ad excerpts 20 seconds from a 2004 NPR story titled "Massachusetts Schools Grapple with Including Gay and Lesbian Relationships in Sex Education." The piece examined how teachers were approaching the issue of same-sex relationships following the legalization of gay marriage in Massachusetts.
Of course, fair use, is all subjective, and NPR contends that this is not a case of fair use. "We've not had a potlicial organization use our content in this manner and, frankly, violate our copyright in this manner," says Dana Davis Rehm, a senior vice president at NPR overseeing communications.
She notes that two-thirds of the ad is comprised of audio from the NPR story. She further argues that the TV spots harm the reputation of NPR. "It may give people the impression that NPR permitted the use of the content in this manner, it may give people an impression that NPR has a position on this topic, either for or against the issue being discussed."
NPR has asked the Website YouTube, and other sites that were streaming the video, to stop, which they have. But Rehm says NPR has not yet approached television stations, and is still reviewing its legal options.
NPR could seek a court injunction to completely halt the ads, but it is running out of time. Voters will be asked to decide whether to repeal the same-sex marriage law in exactly two weeks.
Al Tompkins teaches broadcast ethics at the Poynter Institute. "In the two weeks that is going to pass between now and election time, it's highly unlikely that you'd be able to get a court to do much in a way of judgement on this, so the election will be over before you get much legal help."
But David Ardia, who directs the Citizen Media Law project at Harvard University, says that NPR may still be able to have an impact with its actions. "When you're talking about a political campaign, where time is of the essense, the fact that a video has been taken down during that time period can actually have the effect the copyright holder wants."
He notes that it is standard practice for a video to stay off YouTube for at least 10 days during which the copyright holder relents or decides to pursue legal action against the user. "And when you're talking about a 10-day window and only two weeks between the take down notice and the election, that can result in the video being down for most of the relevant time period."
Meanwhile, though, the ads are still running on television."
http://www.mpbn.net/Home/tabid/36/ctl/ViewItem/mid/3478/ItemId/9474/Default.aspx
ImageRights Launches to Help Protect Photographers and Stock-Photo Agencies from Copyright Infringement; Reuters, 10/22/09
Reuters; ImageRights Launches to Help Protect Photographers and Stock-Photo Agencies from Copyright Infringement:
New Service Enables Individuals and Agencies to Upload Photos and ReceiveReports Indicating Which Persons or Companies are Using Proprietary ImagesWithout Prior Consent or Payment
"ImageRights International, an Internet-based services company, today announcedthe availability of its first service-ImageRights-a low-cost, easy to usesolution designed to help protect the copyrights of photographers and stock-photo agencies. Targeted to the estimated three million worldwide commercial photographers, ImageRights is applying visual search and image recognition technology to track the use of photographs and illustrations across the Internet, enabling rights holders to discover and ultimately recover fees for the unlicensed use of their works."
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS133608+22-Oct-2009+BW20091022
New Service Enables Individuals and Agencies to Upload Photos and ReceiveReports Indicating Which Persons or Companies are Using Proprietary ImagesWithout Prior Consent or Payment
"ImageRights International, an Internet-based services company, today announcedthe availability of its first service-ImageRights-a low-cost, easy to usesolution designed to help protect the copyrights of photographers and stock-photo agencies. Targeted to the estimated three million worldwide commercial photographers, ImageRights is applying visual search and image recognition technology to track the use of photographs and illustrations across the Internet, enabling rights holders to discover and ultimately recover fees for the unlicensed use of their works."
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS133608+22-Oct-2009+BW20091022
British Copyright Org Threatens Singing Store Employee, Then Apologizes; DailyTech, 10/23/09
Jason Mick, DailyTech; British Copyright Org Threatens Singing Store Employee, Then Apologizes:
"The humorous tale involves the organization catching wind of a “heinous” offense -- an employee singing in public. Sandra Burt, 56, who works at A&T Food store (a British supermarket) in Clackmannanshire, UK was told by organization representatives that she would likely face fines for lost royalties for her "performance".
The debacle began earlier in the year when the PRS threatened the grocery store she worked at, telling them to ditch the radio that played in earshot of customers or pay royalty fees. Missing the music, Ms. Burt decided to start singing some of her favorite tunes. She describes, "I would start to sing to myself when I was stacking the shelves just to keep me happy because it was very quiet without the radio.
"Then came new threats from the PRS. Ms. Burt describes, "When I heard that the PRS said I would be prosecuted for not having a performance license, I thought it was a joke and started laughing. I was then told I could be fined thousands of pounds. But I couldn't stop myself singing."
http://www.dailytech.com/British+Copyright+Org+Threatens+Singing+Store+Employee+Then+Apologizes/article16592.htm
"The humorous tale involves the organization catching wind of a “heinous” offense -- an employee singing in public. Sandra Burt, 56, who works at A&T Food store (a British supermarket) in Clackmannanshire, UK was told by organization representatives that she would likely face fines for lost royalties for her "performance".
The debacle began earlier in the year when the PRS threatened the grocery store she worked at, telling them to ditch the radio that played in earshot of customers or pay royalty fees. Missing the music, Ms. Burt decided to start singing some of her favorite tunes. She describes, "I would start to sing to myself when I was stacking the shelves just to keep me happy because it was very quiet without the radio.
"Then came new threats from the PRS. Ms. Burt describes, "When I heard that the PRS said I would be prosecuted for not having a performance license, I thought it was a joke and started laughing. I was then told I could be fined thousands of pounds. But I couldn't stop myself singing."
http://www.dailytech.com/British+Copyright+Org+Threatens+Singing+Store+Employee+Then+Apologizes/article16592.htm
Book Review: 'Moral Panics and the Copyright Wars' by William Patry; LA Times, 10/23/09
Book Review: 'Moral Panics and the Copyright Wars' by William Patry; Reviewed by Jonathan Handel; LA Times:
"Into this copyright war walks William Patry. Extraordinarily well-credentialed, Patry has been a copyright lawyer for 27 years as a professor, practitioner and government attorney. Currently, he's Google's senior copyright counsel. Though Patry says he's in favor of "effective" copyright protection, he writes that "bad business models, failed economic ideologies, and acceptance of inapposite metaphors have led to an unjustified expansion" of those laws.
Patry's stature makes "Moral Panics and the Copyright Wars" an "important" book. Unfortunately, what the book delivers is a choppy and directionless narrative, sometimes illuminating but too often scattershot, unoriginal and strident. Unsupported claims abound...
This presentation is informative, but it's marred by Patry's habit of presenting arguments as though he were the first to devise them. An example is his claim that entertainment companies attack file sharing instead of innovating: Books by Lawrence Lessig, Tarleton Gillespie and others have made similar arguments more effectively. Patry discusses few of these works and adds little.
In fact, Patry has nothing good to say about copyright law. What do "effective" copyright laws look like? Read his book and you still won't know. The Constitution offers a hint: Copyright is intended to "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts." Various scholars interpret that to mean a delicate balance of rights. Of course, the devil is in the details, but Patry offers none...
The author all but celebrates illegal file sharing, but would he be so sanguine if his own company's intellectual property -- its computer source code -- were shared in this fashion? One might imagine that what's good for the goose is good for the Google, but it's more likely the company would sue. Indeed, the entire technology industry is built on copyrights, patents and trade secrets, backed up by tough contracts and tougher lawyers. (By the way, Patry advocated copyright reform years before joining Google and says the book should not be interpreted as reflecting the views of his current employer.)
Certainly it's untenable for entertainment companies and copyright law itself to remain at war with millions of citizens. For better and worse, technology has unleashed new norms, and some accommodation must be found. Unfortunately, this book sheds little light on how that should happen."
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/arts/la-et-book23-2009oct23,0,6896339.story
"Into this copyright war walks William Patry. Extraordinarily well-credentialed, Patry has been a copyright lawyer for 27 years as a professor, practitioner and government attorney. Currently, he's Google's senior copyright counsel. Though Patry says he's in favor of "effective" copyright protection, he writes that "bad business models, failed economic ideologies, and acceptance of inapposite metaphors have led to an unjustified expansion" of those laws.
Patry's stature makes "Moral Panics and the Copyright Wars" an "important" book. Unfortunately, what the book delivers is a choppy and directionless narrative, sometimes illuminating but too often scattershot, unoriginal and strident. Unsupported claims abound...
This presentation is informative, but it's marred by Patry's habit of presenting arguments as though he were the first to devise them. An example is his claim that entertainment companies attack file sharing instead of innovating: Books by Lawrence Lessig, Tarleton Gillespie and others have made similar arguments more effectively. Patry discusses few of these works and adds little.
In fact, Patry has nothing good to say about copyright law. What do "effective" copyright laws look like? Read his book and you still won't know. The Constitution offers a hint: Copyright is intended to "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts." Various scholars interpret that to mean a delicate balance of rights. Of course, the devil is in the details, but Patry offers none...
The author all but celebrates illegal file sharing, but would he be so sanguine if his own company's intellectual property -- its computer source code -- were shared in this fashion? One might imagine that what's good for the goose is good for the Google, but it's more likely the company would sue. Indeed, the entire technology industry is built on copyrights, patents and trade secrets, backed up by tough contracts and tougher lawyers. (By the way, Patry advocated copyright reform years before joining Google and says the book should not be interpreted as reflecting the views of his current employer.)
Certainly it's untenable for entertainment companies and copyright law itself to remain at war with millions of citizens. For better and worse, technology has unleashed new norms, and some accommodation must be found. Unfortunately, this book sheds little light on how that should happen."
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/arts/la-et-book23-2009oct23,0,6896339.story
Universities in hot water over students' peer-to-peer sharing; ZDNet, 10/25/09
Zack Whittaker, ZDNet; Universities in hot water over students' peer-to-peer sharing:
"The battle against online piracy is heating up: a new artist led initiative is taking on the diplomatic and negotiation approach whereas governments and legislators are hitting down punitive policies on their citizens.
Jon Newton of p2pnet, alongside Billy Bragg, musician and director of the Featured Artists Coalition, have begun work on a2f2a.com, a campaign started to discuss how artists can cut out the middleman - such as the suicide inducing RIAA - and ensure artists are fairly remunerated.
Along with their mission statement, the efforts seem to be focused towards not only admitting there is no technological solution to the problems artists already face, but that users would be “willing to pay for music if they can be sure that the money is going to the artists whose work they enjoy.”"
http://blogs.zdnet.com/igeneration/?p=3168
"The battle against online piracy is heating up: a new artist led initiative is taking on the diplomatic and negotiation approach whereas governments and legislators are hitting down punitive policies on their citizens.
Jon Newton of p2pnet, alongside Billy Bragg, musician and director of the Featured Artists Coalition, have begun work on a2f2a.com, a campaign started to discuss how artists can cut out the middleman - such as the suicide inducing RIAA - and ensure artists are fairly remunerated.
Along with their mission statement, the efforts seem to be focused towards not only admitting there is no technological solution to the problems artists already face, but that users would be “willing to pay for music if they can be sure that the money is going to the artists whose work they enjoy.”"
http://blogs.zdnet.com/igeneration/?p=3168
David Lammy calls for pan-European approach to copyright protection; Guardian, 10/27/09
Mark Sweney, Guardian; David Lammy calls for pan-European approach to copyright protection:
Intellectual property minister tells C&binet Forum delegates that progress on copyright piracy cannot be made without a 'European consensus'
"David Lammy, the intellectual property minister, has today warned that the UK cannot solve the problem of copyright piracy without the support of other European governments.
Lammy, speaking at the government's digital creative industries conference C&binet, said the UK has been stymied in its efforts to strengthen the enforcement of copyright because it is a "minority" player on the European stage.
"Some people tell me that content is national, they tell me the solutions lie in my backyard [but] this is not right, content is international," he added.
"Solutions lie internationally. For us, solutions lie in Europe. The UK must continue to encourage and support wider innovation and improve access to copyright works. But we can do relatively little domestically. A great deal of policy making is harmonised at European level and progress simply can't be made without a European consensus," Lammy said.
"The UK often finds itself in the minority in Europe when it comes to copyright issues. I want to see the UK play a greater role in influencing European action."
He added that while models needed to be developed to make legitimate content attractive to all, consumers needed to understand they had to pay to make the system work.
"If the world wants to continue to enjoy works that are protected by copyright, then the world must be a paying customer," he said. "Consumers have built a digital culture based on access, even if it cuts across the law. I want a world where rights holders will be paid for their efforts. For me, the balance must always tilt strongly in favour of freedom. But freedom to access material is not the same thing as access for free."
Lammy added that the current copyright system was out of step with the digital age and that government and businesses had "sleepwalked" into the piracy situation.
"The mechanisms by which copyright operates can be too complex. I don't want to see copyright, in the UK, or anywhere in the world, lagging so far behind technology that it loses relevance," he said. "I don't want to see a regime based on arbitrary rules. It must ensure that it allows limited copying for personal use of lawfully obtained material. I want to see this made possible rather than discouraged."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/oct/27/david-lammy-copyright-piracy-europe
Intellectual property minister tells C&binet Forum delegates that progress on copyright piracy cannot be made without a 'European consensus'
"David Lammy, the intellectual property minister, has today warned that the UK cannot solve the problem of copyright piracy without the support of other European governments.
Lammy, speaking at the government's digital creative industries conference C&binet, said the UK has been stymied in its efforts to strengthen the enforcement of copyright because it is a "minority" player on the European stage.
"Some people tell me that content is national, they tell me the solutions lie in my backyard [but] this is not right, content is international," he added.
"Solutions lie internationally. For us, solutions lie in Europe. The UK must continue to encourage and support wider innovation and improve access to copyright works. But we can do relatively little domestically. A great deal of policy making is harmonised at European level and progress simply can't be made without a European consensus," Lammy said.
"The UK often finds itself in the minority in Europe when it comes to copyright issues. I want to see the UK play a greater role in influencing European action."
He added that while models needed to be developed to make legitimate content attractive to all, consumers needed to understand they had to pay to make the system work.
"If the world wants to continue to enjoy works that are protected by copyright, then the world must be a paying customer," he said. "Consumers have built a digital culture based on access, even if it cuts across the law. I want a world where rights holders will be paid for their efforts. For me, the balance must always tilt strongly in favour of freedom. But freedom to access material is not the same thing as access for free."
Lammy added that the current copyright system was out of step with the digital age and that government and businesses had "sleepwalked" into the piracy situation.
"The mechanisms by which copyright operates can be too complex. I don't want to see copyright, in the UK, or anywhere in the world, lagging so far behind technology that it loses relevance," he said. "I don't want to see a regime based on arbitrary rules. It must ensure that it allows limited copying for personal use of lawfully obtained material. I want to see this made possible rather than discouraged."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/oct/27/david-lammy-copyright-piracy-europe
Chinese Authors Object to Google’s Book Scanning; New York Times, 10/30/09
Sharon LaFraniere, New York Times; Chinese Authors Object to Google’s Book Scanning:
"Two Chinese writers’ groups claim that Google has scanned Chinese works into an electronic database in violation of international copyright standards. The organizations are urging China’s authors to step forward and defend their rights.
“Google has seriously violated the copyrights of Chinese authors. That is an undeniable fact,” Chen Qirong, a spokesperson for the China Writers’ Association, said by telephone. The group says it represents nearly 9,000 writers.
Google has sent a representative to Beijing to meet on Monday with officials of the China Written Works Copyright Society, which manages Chinese copyrights. The company insists it has fully complied with copyright protections...
“We take the view, backed up by international copyright law, that no copyright is violated in this process since the amount of text displayed is so small and it’s purely for information,” said Courtney Hohne, a Google spokeswoman, in an phone interview from Singapore. “In fact, it’s comparable to a quotation from a book in a review or our Web search results, both of which are perfectly legal.” Ms. Hohne said it is virtually impossible for Google to discover who holds the rights to all of the millions of books on library shelves. Waiting for copyright holders to surface would doom any effort to create a comprehensive electronic index, she said. If a copyright holder does object, Google removes the snippets or even all reference to the book from the search engine, she said.
The Chinese groups see it differently. “It is as you have something nice in your living room and Google takes it and puts it in its living room,” said Zhang Hongbo, deputy director general of the Chinese copyright society. “We are definitely opposed to using our works without our permission.”...
Marybeth Peters, the top copyright official in the United States, told Congress in September that the settlement could put “diplomatic stress” on the government because it would affect foreign authors whose rights are protected by international treaties. The governments of France and Germany formally oppose the deal."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/31/technology/internet/31google.html
"Two Chinese writers’ groups claim that Google has scanned Chinese works into an electronic database in violation of international copyright standards. The organizations are urging China’s authors to step forward and defend their rights.
“Google has seriously violated the copyrights of Chinese authors. That is an undeniable fact,” Chen Qirong, a spokesperson for the China Writers’ Association, said by telephone. The group says it represents nearly 9,000 writers.
Google has sent a representative to Beijing to meet on Monday with officials of the China Written Works Copyright Society, which manages Chinese copyrights. The company insists it has fully complied with copyright protections...
“We take the view, backed up by international copyright law, that no copyright is violated in this process since the amount of text displayed is so small and it’s purely for information,” said Courtney Hohne, a Google spokeswoman, in an phone interview from Singapore. “In fact, it’s comparable to a quotation from a book in a review or our Web search results, both of which are perfectly legal.” Ms. Hohne said it is virtually impossible for Google to discover who holds the rights to all of the millions of books on library shelves. Waiting for copyright holders to surface would doom any effort to create a comprehensive electronic index, she said. If a copyright holder does object, Google removes the snippets or even all reference to the book from the search engine, she said.
The Chinese groups see it differently. “It is as you have something nice in your living room and Google takes it and puts it in its living room,” said Zhang Hongbo, deputy director general of the Chinese copyright society. “We are definitely opposed to using our works without our permission.”...
Marybeth Peters, the top copyright official in the United States, told Congress in September that the settlement could put “diplomatic stress” on the government because it would affect foreign authors whose rights are protected by international treaties. The governments of France and Germany formally oppose the deal."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/31/technology/internet/31google.html
Down Under musician says he's dinkum; Sydney Morning Herald, 10/30/09
Joel Gibson, Sydney Morning Herald; Down Under musician says he's dinkum:
"Larrikin Music Publishing, which owns the rights to Kookaburra, is suing Hay and Strykert and their publishing company, EMI, claiming they reproduced more than half of Kookaburra and made a small fortune from it in royalties, licences and sheet music sales.
Larrikin wants 40 to 60 per cent of income earned from Down Under in future and in the past six years, which is as far back as the law allows. But the authors and EMI say the use of the Kookaburra melody was unconscious, and is a fair adaptation under the Copyright Act.
Even if it was an infringement, they argue Larrikin is ''over-reaching'', saying many of the 20-plus versions of the song do not contain the flute riff."
http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/people/down-under-musician-says-hes-dinkum-20091029-hnr1.html
"Larrikin Music Publishing, which owns the rights to Kookaburra, is suing Hay and Strykert and their publishing company, EMI, claiming they reproduced more than half of Kookaburra and made a small fortune from it in royalties, licences and sheet music sales.
Larrikin wants 40 to 60 per cent of income earned from Down Under in future and in the past six years, which is as far back as the law allows. But the authors and EMI say the use of the Kookaburra melody was unconscious, and is a fair adaptation under the Copyright Act.
Even if it was an infringement, they argue Larrikin is ''over-reaching'', saying many of the 20-plus versions of the song do not contain the flute riff."
http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/people/down-under-musician-says-hes-dinkum-20091029-hnr1.html
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Med students hoist P2P Jolly Roger to get access to papers; TechDirt, 10/29/09
John Timmer, Ars Technica; Med students hoist P2P Jolly Roger to get access to papers:
Med students hoist P2P Jolly Roger to get access to papers
"The ease with which information can be spread through the Internet has exacerbated tensions among those who pay for, conduct, and publish scientific research. Many journals still require subscription or per-article payments for access to the research they publish, which often leaves the public, who funds a significant percentage of the research, on the wrong side of a pay wall. So far, however, there's been little evidence that the public has been interested enough in research to engage in the sort of widespread file-sharing that plague other content industries. But a new study suggests that may just be because nobody's looked very carefully.
The study, which was spotted by TechDirt, appears in an open-access journal, so anyone can read its entire contents. It describes the sharing of over 5,000 research papers on a site frequented by medical professionals, and the formal community rules that governed the exchange.
During the six months in 2008 that the author tracked the activity on the site, which was a discussion board focused on medical fields, it had over 125,000 registered users. Anyone could start an account, but many of the fora were focused on specific issues, such as those faced by nurses and residents. In addition to those, however, there was a section called the Electronic Library that contained a forum called "Databases & Journals—Requests and Enquiries."
Up to three times a day, users were allowed to submit a request for a published research article, accompanied by a link to the free abstract hosted at the journal's website. Other users would then download the full article and host it somewhere, providing a link in the discussion. If everything was set up properly, the site would track the number of downloads.
Over the course of six months, over 6,500 articles were requested, and over 80 percent of those requests were successfully filled."
http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2009/10/med-students-hoist-p2p-jolly-roger-to-get-access-to-papers.ars
Med students hoist P2P Jolly Roger to get access to papers
"The ease with which information can be spread through the Internet has exacerbated tensions among those who pay for, conduct, and publish scientific research. Many journals still require subscription or per-article payments for access to the research they publish, which often leaves the public, who funds a significant percentage of the research, on the wrong side of a pay wall. So far, however, there's been little evidence that the public has been interested enough in research to engage in the sort of widespread file-sharing that plague other content industries. But a new study suggests that may just be because nobody's looked very carefully.
The study, which was spotted by TechDirt, appears in an open-access journal, so anyone can read its entire contents. It describes the sharing of over 5,000 research papers on a site frequented by medical professionals, and the formal community rules that governed the exchange.
During the six months in 2008 that the author tracked the activity on the site, which was a discussion board focused on medical fields, it had over 125,000 registered users. Anyone could start an account, but many of the fora were focused on specific issues, such as those faced by nurses and residents. In addition to those, however, there was a section called the Electronic Library that contained a forum called "Databases & Journals—Requests and Enquiries."
Up to three times a day, users were allowed to submit a request for a published research article, accompanied by a link to the free abstract hosted at the journal's website. Other users would then download the full article and host it somewhere, providing a link in the discussion. If everything was set up properly, the site would track the number of downloads.
Over the course of six months, over 6,500 articles were requested, and over 80 percent of those requests were successfully filled."
http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2009/10/med-students-hoist-p2p-jolly-roger-to-get-access-to-papers.ars
F. Scott Fitzgerald Made $8,397 On Great Gatsby; His Daughter Gets $500,000 Per Year From It; TechDirt, 10/29/09
Mike Masnick, TechDirt; F. Scott Fitzgerald Made $8,397 On Great Gatsby; His Daughter Gets $500,000 Per Year From It:
"There have been an increasing number of questions raised about both the length of copyright and the fact that it passes on to heirs after the original creator passes on. The original purpose of copyright had nothing to do with creating a welfare system for the children of content creators, no matter how much some content creators would like it to work that way. Economist Greg Mankiw points out a "factoid" that drives home the oddity that comes from such long copyrights:
Royalties from The Great Gatsby totaled only $8,397 during Fitzgerald's lifetime. Today Gatsby is read in nearly every high school and college and regularly produces $500,000 a year in [F. Scott Fitzgerald's daughter] Scottie's trust for her children."
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091028/0217246703.shtml
"There have been an increasing number of questions raised about both the length of copyright and the fact that it passes on to heirs after the original creator passes on. The original purpose of copyright had nothing to do with creating a welfare system for the children of content creators, no matter how much some content creators would like it to work that way. Economist Greg Mankiw points out a "factoid" that drives home the oddity that comes from such long copyrights:
Royalties from The Great Gatsby totaled only $8,397 during Fitzgerald's lifetime. Today Gatsby is read in nearly every high school and college and regularly produces $500,000 a year in [F. Scott Fitzgerald's daughter] Scottie's trust for her children."
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091028/0217246703.shtml
TalkTalk threatens legal action over Mandelson's filesharing plan; Guardian, 10/29/09
Mark Sweney, Guardian; TalkTalk threatens legal action over Mandelson's filesharing plan:
Carphone Warehouse-owned internet service provider attacks plans to cut off connections of persistent filesharers
"TalkTalk, the second largest internet service provider in the UK, has threatened to launch legal action if business secretary Peter Mandelson follows through with his plan to cut off persistent illegal filesharers' internet connections.
Carphone Warehouse-owned TalkTalk, which has more than 4 million ISP customers and owns the Tiscali and AOL brands, claimed the government's plan was based on filesharers being "guilty until proven innocent" and constituted an infringement of human rights.
"The approach is based on the principle of 'guilty until proven innocent' and substitutes proper judicial process for a kangaroo court," said Andrew Heaney, the executive director of strategy and regulation at TalkTalk. "We know this approach will lead to wrongful accusations."
The government plans to look at increased action against illegal downloaders, including potentially suspending the accounts of persistent offenders, from July 2011 if a 70% reduction in online piracy is not achieved by sending warning letters. Customers will have the right to appeal if they are targeted and their connection subjected to technical measures.
"If the government moves to stage two, we would consider that extra-judicial technical measures, and would look to appeal the decision [to the courts] because it infringes human rights," Heaney said. "TalkTalk will continue to resist any attempts to make it impose technical measures on its customers unless directed to do so by a court or recognised tribunal."
BT, the largest ISP in the UK, said it "remains concerned" about some of the government's proposals and is "interested to hear whether or not customers will have some form of fair legal hearing before their broadband supplier is required to take any action against them"."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/oct/29/talktalk-threatens-legal-action-mandelson
Carphone Warehouse-owned internet service provider attacks plans to cut off connections of persistent filesharers
"TalkTalk, the second largest internet service provider in the UK, has threatened to launch legal action if business secretary Peter Mandelson follows through with his plan to cut off persistent illegal filesharers' internet connections.
Carphone Warehouse-owned TalkTalk, which has more than 4 million ISP customers and owns the Tiscali and AOL brands, claimed the government's plan was based on filesharers being "guilty until proven innocent" and constituted an infringement of human rights.
"The approach is based on the principle of 'guilty until proven innocent' and substitutes proper judicial process for a kangaroo court," said Andrew Heaney, the executive director of strategy and regulation at TalkTalk. "We know this approach will lead to wrongful accusations."
The government plans to look at increased action against illegal downloaders, including potentially suspending the accounts of persistent offenders, from July 2011 if a 70% reduction in online piracy is not achieved by sending warning letters. Customers will have the right to appeal if they are targeted and their connection subjected to technical measures.
"If the government moves to stage two, we would consider that extra-judicial technical measures, and would look to appeal the decision [to the courts] because it infringes human rights," Heaney said. "TalkTalk will continue to resist any attempts to make it impose technical measures on its customers unless directed to do so by a court or recognised tribunal."
BT, the largest ISP in the UK, said it "remains concerned" about some of the government's proposals and is "interested to hear whether or not customers will have some form of fair legal hearing before their broadband supplier is required to take any action against them"."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/oct/29/talktalk-threatens-legal-action-mandelson
Costs would exceed savings on Mandelson plan, ISPs say - and streaming companies not eager either; Guardian, 10/28/09
Charles Arthur, Guardian; Costs would exceed savings on Mandelson plan, ISPs say - and streaming companies not eager either:
Implementing "three strikes" rule would weigh down ISPs while bringing music industry no benefit - and streaming companies unhappy
"Lord Mandelson's proposals to cut off "persistent" file sharers do not make financial sense, according to estimates of its cost put forward by those who would have to implement it.
British Telecom and Carphone Warehouse estimate that running the enforcement system would cost about £2 per broadband line per month - a total of £24 per broadband line per year. With 17.6m broadband connections in the UK as of September, means it would cost £420m annually to run a system to defeat a problem the music industry complains costs it £200m per year.
Lord Mandelson said that "ISPs and rights-holders will share the costs, on the basis of a flat fee that will allow both sides to budget and plan."
If the costs of running the system are equally shared between rights-holders and ISPs, that means that ISPs will have to push up bills for the majority of law-abiding customers who do not download illegally, while the rights-holders spend as much as they claim they are losing.
Reactions from the music and music streaming industry to Lord Mandelson's reasserted determination to cut off "persistent" file-sharers has not been positive either."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2009/oct/28/costs-piracy-filesharing-mandelson
Implementing "three strikes" rule would weigh down ISPs while bringing music industry no benefit - and streaming companies unhappy
"Lord Mandelson's proposals to cut off "persistent" file sharers do not make financial sense, according to estimates of its cost put forward by those who would have to implement it.
British Telecom and Carphone Warehouse estimate that running the enforcement system would cost about £2 per broadband line per month - a total of £24 per broadband line per year. With 17.6m broadband connections in the UK as of September, means it would cost £420m annually to run a system to defeat a problem the music industry complains costs it £200m per year.
Lord Mandelson said that "ISPs and rights-holders will share the costs, on the basis of a flat fee that will allow both sides to budget and plan."
If the costs of running the system are equally shared between rights-holders and ISPs, that means that ISPs will have to push up bills for the majority of law-abiding customers who do not download illegally, while the rights-holders spend as much as they claim they are losing.
Reactions from the music and music streaming industry to Lord Mandelson's reasserted determination to cut off "persistent" file-sharers has not been positive either."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2009/oct/28/costs-piracy-filesharing-mandelson
Google Accused of 'malicious Revenge' in China; PC World, 10/28/09
Owen Fletcher, PC World; Google Accused of 'malicious Revenge' in China:
"The official newspaper of China's ruling communist party has accused Google of seeking "malicious revenge" after a malware warning appeared by one of its Web sites in Google's search results.
The Google notice, which said the books section of the People's Daily site could contain malware, appeared last week and prevented some visits to the Web page because its link redirected to a Google warning, according to a local media report also posted by the People's Daily. A site representative was cited in the report as blaming "malicious revenge from Google" and saying the paper would take actions against such "vile behavior" by the company. The paper would not rule out legal action, the representative was cited as saying.
The paper's statements are the latest negative press Google has received this year in China, where its share of the user search market began slipping in recent months. Chinese authorities and state media earlier this year slammed Google for allowing pornographic links to appear in its search results. Google's book scanning project has also come under fire in China in recent weeks as local authors have begun voicing concerns about copyright violation by the search engine...
The top headline on the book news site on Wednesday led to a collection of stories about local opposition to Google's book scanning program. "Is the Google library an angel or a devil?" read one headline near the top of the page."
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/174549/google_accused_of_malicious_revenge_in_china.html
"The official newspaper of China's ruling communist party has accused Google of seeking "malicious revenge" after a malware warning appeared by one of its Web sites in Google's search results.
The Google notice, which said the books section of the People's Daily site could contain malware, appeared last week and prevented some visits to the Web page because its link redirected to a Google warning, according to a local media report also posted by the People's Daily. A site representative was cited in the report as blaming "malicious revenge from Google" and saying the paper would take actions against such "vile behavior" by the company. The paper would not rule out legal action, the representative was cited as saying.
The paper's statements are the latest negative press Google has received this year in China, where its share of the user search market began slipping in recent months. Chinese authorities and state media earlier this year slammed Google for allowing pornographic links to appear in its search results. Google's book scanning project has also come under fire in China in recent weeks as local authors have begun voicing concerns about copyright violation by the search engine...
The top headline on the book news site on Wednesday led to a collection of stories about local opposition to Google's book scanning program. "Is the Google library an angel or a devil?" read one headline near the top of the page."
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/174549/google_accused_of_malicious_revenge_in_china.html
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
EFF opens the "Takedown Hall of Shame"; Ars Technica, 10/28/09
Nate Anderson, Ars Technica; EFF opens the "Takedown Hall of Shame":
Missing that wonderful surge of anger that comes from hearing about some bogus attempt at shutting down free speech with a DMCA takedown notice? The EFF has you covered, opening a new "Hall of Shame" to highlight the worst of the worst.
"The Electronic Frontier Foundation is a big fan of naming and shaming. When it launched its patent-busting project a few years back, the activist group put up a "Wanted by EFF marshals" poster; eight of the ten patents on the list have already been narrowed, invalidated, or reexamined.
So when it wanted to highlight the overzealous use of DMCA takedown notices on the Web, the EFF went a similar route with its new "Takedown Hall of Shame."
Initially, eight items have been granted the coveted laurel wreath of infamy:
NPR's takedown request of some All Things Considered audio used in a recent same-sex marriage ad
The National Organization for Marriage's takedown request on audition footage for its anti-gay marriage ad
Nativist radio host Michael Savage's takedown request against the Council on Islamic-American Relations for posting clips of the rhetoric found on Savage's show
Polo Ralph Lauren's takedown request against Boing Boing and the Photoshop Disasters blog over a ridiculously photoshopped model whose head looked like a pumpkin on a toothpick
Warner Music Group's YouTube takedowns against "literal videos" and teens singing Warner songs a cappella for friends
Diamond giant DeBeers' attempt to shutter a parody site that looked like the New York Times and contained a fake DeBeers ad reading: "Your purchase of a diamond will enable us to donate a prosthetic for an African whose hand was lost in diamond conflicts. DeBeers: from her fingers to his."
Diebold's 2003 takedown attempt against internal e-mails revealing problems with the company's voting machines
NBC's takedown request of an Obama campaign video in which Tom Brokaw calls the election for John McCain...
One other item of interest: Big Content is represented less than one might think. The complete list does mention NBC, NPR, Warner Music, CBS News, and Universal Music, but it's dominated by smaller, non-media players like Union Square Partnership, Professional Rodeo Cowboys Association, Uri Geller, Diebold, and DeBeers.
If you talk to lawyers for the big content providers (which we do so you don't have to! I kid, they're nice people), they will point out that the flood of DMCA takedown notices they issue results only in a handful of problem cases. These are then—unfairly, in their view—harped on repeatedly to suggest that they care nothing for fair use, have no sense of proportion, and probably nibble on succulent children for breakfast."
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/10/eff-opens-the-takedown-hall-of-shame.ars
Missing that wonderful surge of anger that comes from hearing about some bogus attempt at shutting down free speech with a DMCA takedown notice? The EFF has you covered, opening a new "Hall of Shame" to highlight the worst of the worst.
"The Electronic Frontier Foundation is a big fan of naming and shaming. When it launched its patent-busting project a few years back, the activist group put up a "Wanted by EFF marshals" poster; eight of the ten patents on the list have already been narrowed, invalidated, or reexamined.
So when it wanted to highlight the overzealous use of DMCA takedown notices on the Web, the EFF went a similar route with its new "Takedown Hall of Shame."
Initially, eight items have been granted the coveted laurel wreath of infamy:
NPR's takedown request of some All Things Considered audio used in a recent same-sex marriage ad
The National Organization for Marriage's takedown request on audition footage for its anti-gay marriage ad
Nativist radio host Michael Savage's takedown request against the Council on Islamic-American Relations for posting clips of the rhetoric found on Savage's show
Polo Ralph Lauren's takedown request against Boing Boing and the Photoshop Disasters blog over a ridiculously photoshopped model whose head looked like a pumpkin on a toothpick
Warner Music Group's YouTube takedowns against "literal videos" and teens singing Warner songs a cappella for friends
Diamond giant DeBeers' attempt to shutter a parody site that looked like the New York Times and contained a fake DeBeers ad reading: "Your purchase of a diamond will enable us to donate a prosthetic for an African whose hand was lost in diamond conflicts. DeBeers: from her fingers to his."
Diebold's 2003 takedown attempt against internal e-mails revealing problems with the company's voting machines
NBC's takedown request of an Obama campaign video in which Tom Brokaw calls the election for John McCain...
One other item of interest: Big Content is represented less than one might think. The complete list does mention NBC, NPR, Warner Music, CBS News, and Universal Music, but it's dominated by smaller, non-media players like Union Square Partnership, Professional Rodeo Cowboys Association, Uri Geller, Diebold, and DeBeers.
If you talk to lawyers for the big content providers (which we do so you don't have to! I kid, they're nice people), they will point out that the flood of DMCA takedown notices they issue results only in a handful of problem cases. These are then—unfairly, in their view—harped on repeatedly to suggest that they care nothing for fair use, have no sense of proportion, and probably nibble on succulent children for breakfast."
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/10/eff-opens-the-takedown-hall-of-shame.ars
Internet Hating Sony Pictures CEO Insists Piracy Is Killing Movie Business; But Facts Show Otherwise; TechDirt, 10/28/09
Mike Masnick, TechDirt; Internet Hating Sony Pictures CEO Insists Piracy Is Killing Movie Business; But Facts Show Otherwise:
"Ah, remember Michael Lynton? The Sony Pictures CEO who earlier this year insisted that nothing good had come from the internet at all. When everyone started mocking him for this statement, rather than back off, he doubled down and insisted it was true, using examples that were easily debunked. Apparently, he hasn't learned his lesson. He's back at it, pushing for the UK (and others) to pass laws kicking people off the internet (so-called "three strikes" laws) while insisting that due to piracy there's less money to make movies and fewer movies being made. Of course, those are things that can be fact checked, and the folks over at TorrentFreak did exactly that, pointing out that more movies are coming out each year and more money is being made. Oops."
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091027/1255556697.shtml
"Ah, remember Michael Lynton? The Sony Pictures CEO who earlier this year insisted that nothing good had come from the internet at all. When everyone started mocking him for this statement, rather than back off, he doubled down and insisted it was true, using examples that were easily debunked. Apparently, he hasn't learned his lesson. He's back at it, pushing for the UK (and others) to pass laws kicking people off the internet (so-called "three strikes" laws) while insisting that due to piracy there's less money to make movies and fewer movies being made. Of course, those are things that can be fact checked, and the folks over at TorrentFreak did exactly that, pointing out that more movies are coming out each year and more money is being made. Oops."
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091027/1255556697.shtml
Japanese Prosecutors Still Want To Blame Developer Of File Sharing Program For Copyright Infringement By Users; TechDirt, 10/28/09
Mike Masnick, TechDirt; Japanese Prosecutors Still Want To Blame Developer Of File Sharing Program For Copyright Infringement By Users:
"We were happy earlier this month to learn that the Osaka High Court had overturned a lower court ruling, against the creator of the popular Japanese file sharing service, Winny...Unfortunately, Japanese prosecutors didn't recognize the common sense and basic logic of such a ruling and are now appealing the case to the Supreme Court in Japan."
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091027/1302086698.shtml
"We were happy earlier this month to learn that the Osaka High Court had overturned a lower court ruling, against the creator of the popular Japanese file sharing service, Winny...Unfortunately, Japanese prosecutors didn't recognize the common sense and basic logic of such a ruling and are now appealing the case to the Supreme Court in Japan."
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091027/1302086698.shtml
French Papers Aim at Younger Readers; New York Times, 10/28/09
Eric Pfanner, New York Times; French Papers Aim at Younger Readers:
"Newspapers have tried many things to stave off a seemingly relentless decline in readers. Now France is pushing forward with a novel approach: giving away papers to young readers in an effort to turn them into regular customers.
The government Tuesday detailed plans of a project called “My Free Newspaper,” under which 18- to 24-year-olds will be offered a free, yearlong subscription to a newspaper of their choice.
“Winning back young readers is essential for the financial survival of the press, and for its civic dimension,” the culture minister, Frédéric Mitterrand, said...
While newspapers nearly everywhere in the developed world are in crisis, hurt by an advertising slump and readers’ defection to the Internet, the problems are particularly pronounced in France. On a per-capita basis, only about half as many papers are sold as in Britain or Germany, according to the World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers in Paris.
Readership in France is especially low among young people. According to a government study, only 10 percent of those aged 15 to 24 read a paid-for newspaper daily in 2007, down from 20 percent a decade earlier."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/28/business/media/28papers.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=free%20newspapers%20france&st=cse
"Newspapers have tried many things to stave off a seemingly relentless decline in readers. Now France is pushing forward with a novel approach: giving away papers to young readers in an effort to turn them into regular customers.
The government Tuesday detailed plans of a project called “My Free Newspaper,” under which 18- to 24-year-olds will be offered a free, yearlong subscription to a newspaper of their choice.
“Winning back young readers is essential for the financial survival of the press, and for its civic dimension,” the culture minister, Frédéric Mitterrand, said...
While newspapers nearly everywhere in the developed world are in crisis, hurt by an advertising slump and readers’ defection to the Internet, the problems are particularly pronounced in France. On a per-capita basis, only about half as many papers are sold as in Britain or Germany, according to the World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers in Paris.
Readership in France is especially low among young people. According to a government study, only 10 percent of those aged 15 to 24 read a paid-for newspaper daily in 2007, down from 20 percent a decade earlier."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/28/business/media/28papers.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=free%20newspapers%20france&st=cse
Labour's plans to block filesharers take shape; Guardian, 10/28/09
Jack Schofield, Guardian; Labour's plans to block filesharers take shape:
"The government has proposed a complicated and expensive system of letters, independent bodies and First Tier Tribunals as a way to stop the sharing of copyright content, but it seems unlikely to work
"Lord Mandelson has "warned internet users today that the days of 'consequence-free' illegal filesharing are over," according to my colleague Mark Sweney. This will no doubt give most of the large copyright owners a warm glow, but whether it will make any practical difference is another matter. I suspect it won't.
The government plan has two stages....In stage 1, a "rights holder" is going to identify the IP address of an illegal uploader by "phishing" on a file-sharing site, then get the ISP to send that user a warning letter. After sending more than one warning, the rights-holder takes legal action.
In stage 2, the ISP takes "technical measures" against the "serious infringer", who can then appeal to "an independent body established by Ofcom". (These "technical measures" may include the not-very-technical suspension of the user's account.) If that appeal is unsuccessful, the "serous infringer" can appeal to a "First Tier Tribunal", following which the "technical measures" are either re-implemented or dropped.
It sounds like an expensive and extremely bureaucratic plan where the cost of implementation will be far higher than the cost of the content. Mandy's thinking is presumably that making a public example of a small number of "serous infringers" will discourage others. It should certainly discourage peer-to-peer file-sharing, at least among those smart enough to realise that if they are downloading something, they are probably uploading it as well."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2009/oct/28/mandelson-blocking-filesharing
"The government has proposed a complicated and expensive system of letters, independent bodies and First Tier Tribunals as a way to stop the sharing of copyright content, but it seems unlikely to work
"Lord Mandelson has "warned internet users today that the days of 'consequence-free' illegal filesharing are over," according to my colleague Mark Sweney. This will no doubt give most of the large copyright owners a warm glow, but whether it will make any practical difference is another matter. I suspect it won't.
The government plan has two stages....In stage 1, a "rights holder" is going to identify the IP address of an illegal uploader by "phishing" on a file-sharing site, then get the ISP to send that user a warning letter. After sending more than one warning, the rights-holder takes legal action.
In stage 2, the ISP takes "technical measures" against the "serious infringer", who can then appeal to "an independent body established by Ofcom". (These "technical measures" may include the not-very-technical suspension of the user's account.) If that appeal is unsuccessful, the "serous infringer" can appeal to a "First Tier Tribunal", following which the "technical measures" are either re-implemented or dropped.
It sounds like an expensive and extremely bureaucratic plan where the cost of implementation will be far higher than the cost of the content. Mandy's thinking is presumably that making a public example of a small number of "serous infringers" will discourage others. It should certainly discourage peer-to-peer file-sharing, at least among those smart enough to realise that if they are downloading something, they are probably uploading it as well."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2009/oct/28/mandelson-blocking-filesharing
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Down Under riff based on folk song, court hears; Sydney Morning Herald, 10/27/09
Joel Gibson, Sydney Morning Herald; Down Under riff based on folk song, court hears:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/entertainment/music/down-under-riff-based-on-folk-song-court-hears/2009/10/27/1256405382225.html
http://www.smh.com.au/news/entertainment/music/down-under-riff-based-on-folk-song-court-hears/2009/10/27/1256405382225.html
UK Law Enforcement Tells UK Gov't: Please Don't Kick File Sharers Offline; TechDirt, 10/27/09
Mike Masnick, TechDirt; UK Law Enforcement Tells UK Gov't: Please Don't Kick File Sharers Offline:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091027/0254326689.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091027/0254326689.shtml
Medical Researchers Resort To File Sharing To Get Access To Journal Research; TechDirt, 10/27/09
Mike Masnick, TechDirt; Medical Researchers Resort to File Sharing to Get Access to Journal Research:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091027/0044576687.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091027/0044576687.shtml
Vivendi head calls for 'three-strikes' rule to tackle UK filesharers; Guardian, 10/27/09
Mark Sweney, Guardian; Vivendi head calls for 'three-strikes' rule to tackle UK filesharers:
Jean-Bernard Levy tells the C&binet [sic] Forum that UK should follow France's lead by cutting off internet access for persistent illegal downloaders
"Jean-Bernard Levy, the chief executive of Vivendi, the French owner of the world's largest record company, Universal Music, said the UK government needs to bring in a "three-strikes" policy that would ultimately cut off persistent illegal filesharers.
Levy, speaking at the UK government's Creativity & Business International Network conference (C&binet) today on the issues facing the creative industries as they move to digital production and distribution, said that while it was too soon to gauge the results of the introduction of the "three-strikes" policy in France, it was a necessary step to protect content owners.
"Britain should be more in favour of developing the media industries and even if France is ahead in legislation it should be obvious [that the UK should] be doing something like three strikes," he added.
Levy said Vivendi, despite owning one of France's largest internet service providers (ISPs), telecoms operator SFR, was convinced the tough legislative strategy would not harm internet use. He added that he expected no real reduction in legal web traffic.
"ISPs should be in favour of legislation," he argued, because a lot of the massive investment to increase broadband capacity was going into supplying bandwidth used by illegal net users...
Gail Rebuck, the chief executive of publisher Random House, told the C&binet conference today that the fact that more than 70 illegal filesharing websites were online within 24 hours of the launch of bestselling author Dan Brown's new novel, The Lost Symbol, showed the urgency with which the government must crack down on digital piracy. This number has since jumped to more than 170 unauthorised websites capitalising on the novel, she added.
Rebuck said measures with strong legal backing needed to be introduced to curb digital copyright abuse. She said: "From where I sit, protecting our copyright is the single most important thing we can debate here. We must protect our authors' work."
"I'm very much for the carrot and stick approach," she added, referring to the need for a combination of promoting the benefits of legal content downloading alongside measures such as letters warning persistent filesharers they are breaking the law.
"As a content owner, I am all for the ultimate sanction," she said, indicating support for measures such as cutting off the worst infringers. "Surely the response is not to say goodbye to copyright.""
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/oct/27/vivendi-file-sharing-levy
Jean-Bernard Levy tells the C&binet [sic] Forum that UK should follow France's lead by cutting off internet access for persistent illegal downloaders
"Jean-Bernard Levy, the chief executive of Vivendi, the French owner of the world's largest record company, Universal Music, said the UK government needs to bring in a "three-strikes" policy that would ultimately cut off persistent illegal filesharers.
Levy, speaking at the UK government's Creativity & Business International Network conference (C&binet) today on the issues facing the creative industries as they move to digital production and distribution, said that while it was too soon to gauge the results of the introduction of the "three-strikes" policy in France, it was a necessary step to protect content owners.
"Britain should be more in favour of developing the media industries and even if France is ahead in legislation it should be obvious [that the UK should] be doing something like three strikes," he added.
Levy said Vivendi, despite owning one of France's largest internet service providers (ISPs), telecoms operator SFR, was convinced the tough legislative strategy would not harm internet use. He added that he expected no real reduction in legal web traffic.
"ISPs should be in favour of legislation," he argued, because a lot of the massive investment to increase broadband capacity was going into supplying bandwidth used by illegal net users...
Gail Rebuck, the chief executive of publisher Random House, told the C&binet conference today that the fact that more than 70 illegal filesharing websites were online within 24 hours of the launch of bestselling author Dan Brown's new novel, The Lost Symbol, showed the urgency with which the government must crack down on digital piracy. This number has since jumped to more than 170 unauthorised websites capitalising on the novel, she added.
Rebuck said measures with strong legal backing needed to be introduced to curb digital copyright abuse. She said: "From where I sit, protecting our copyright is the single most important thing we can debate here. We must protect our authors' work."
"I'm very much for the carrot and stick approach," she added, referring to the need for a combination of promoting the benefits of legal content downloading alongside measures such as letters warning persistent filesharers they are breaking the law.
"As a content owner, I am all for the ultimate sanction," she said, indicating support for measures such as cutting off the worst infringers. "Surely the response is not to say goodbye to copyright.""
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/oct/27/vivendi-file-sharing-levy
Photographer wins copyright ruling; Guardian, 10/26/09
Roy Greenslade, Guardian; Photographer wins copyright ruling:
"The high court made a ruling on 16 October that has important ramifications for newspaper and magazine publishers and photographers, but it appears to have slipped under the mainstream media radar.
Judges found in favour of a freelance photographer Alan Grisbrook who had sued Mirror Group Newspapers for infringing his copyright in archived images.
In a 2002 consent order, following a previous legal action taken by Grisbrook against MGN over unpaid licence fees, MGN agreed to delete all electronic copies of his photos from its systems.
So when Grisbrook discovered last year that MGN were making available back copies of their titles to paying customers through websites, and that these contained some of his images, he believed MGN were infringing his copyright and breaching the previous consent order.
He said that he had never consented to the inclusion of his images in the group's back numbers database nor on their websites.
MGN argued that the use of the images was in the public interest, and that Grisbrook's licence extended to back copy editions archived electronically.
Following the ruling, technology lawyer Tom Cowling said that photographers should look at their licences.
If they have licensed images to a newspaper which, like MGN, is making back copies of their editions available online to paid subscribers, they may well have a claim in copyright infringement if their licence agreement did not clearly allow such use."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2009/oct/26/trinity-mirror-medialaw
"The high court made a ruling on 16 October that has important ramifications for newspaper and magazine publishers and photographers, but it appears to have slipped under the mainstream media radar.
Judges found in favour of a freelance photographer Alan Grisbrook who had sued Mirror Group Newspapers for infringing his copyright in archived images.
In a 2002 consent order, following a previous legal action taken by Grisbrook against MGN over unpaid licence fees, MGN agreed to delete all electronic copies of his photos from its systems.
So when Grisbrook discovered last year that MGN were making available back copies of their titles to paying customers through websites, and that these contained some of his images, he believed MGN were infringing his copyright and breaching the previous consent order.
He said that he had never consented to the inclusion of his images in the group's back numbers database nor on their websites.
MGN argued that the use of the images was in the public interest, and that Grisbrook's licence extended to back copy editions archived electronically.
Following the ruling, technology lawyer Tom Cowling said that photographers should look at their licences.
If they have licensed images to a newspaper which, like MGN, is making back copies of their editions available online to paid subscribers, they may well have a claim in copyright infringement if their licence agreement did not clearly allow such use."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2009/oct/26/trinity-mirror-medialaw
Harry Potter and the chamber of lawyers; Guardian, 10/26/09
Marmite Lover, Guardian; Harry Potter and the chamber of lawyers:
Warner Bros' lawyers have asked Ms Marmite Lover to rename a 'Harry Potter Dinner' at her Underground Restaurant. What alternative dishes can you suggest for 'Generic Wizard Night'?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/wordofmouth/2009/oct/26/harry-potter-halloween-warner-lawyers
Warner Bros' lawyers have asked Ms Marmite Lover to rename a 'Harry Potter Dinner' at her Underground Restaurant. What alternative dishes can you suggest for 'Generic Wizard Night'?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/wordofmouth/2009/oct/26/harry-potter-halloween-warner-lawyers
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Perpetual Protection Of Traditional Knowledge “Not On Table” At WIPO; Intellectual Property Watch, 10/22/09
Kaitlin Mara, Intellectual Property Watch; Perpetual Protection Of Traditional Knowledge “Not On Table” At WIPO:
"The director general also weighed in on issues of copyright.
On the secretive Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, Gurry said that WIPO too did not know a great deal about the talks.
“Naturally we prefer open, transparent international processes to arrive at conclusions that are of concern to the whole world,” he said, citing WIPO’s role as an international, United Nations agency. And, he added, “IP is of concern to the whole world.”
On copyright protection in the internet age, the “problem we have is massive,” he said, citing the example of the newspaper industry and the music industry, both suffering as new technology necessitates changes in old business models."
http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2009/10/22/perpetual-protection-of-traditional-knowledge-%e2%80%9cnot-on-table%e2%80%9d-at-wipo/
"The director general also weighed in on issues of copyright.
On the secretive Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, Gurry said that WIPO too did not know a great deal about the talks.
“Naturally we prefer open, transparent international processes to arrive at conclusions that are of concern to the whole world,” he said, citing WIPO’s role as an international, United Nations agency. And, he added, “IP is of concern to the whole world.”
On copyright protection in the internet age, the “problem we have is massive,” he said, citing the example of the newspaper industry and the music industry, both suffering as new technology necessitates changes in old business models."
http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2009/10/22/perpetual-protection-of-traditional-knowledge-%e2%80%9cnot-on-table%e2%80%9d-at-wipo/
Hulu to charge for content, but needs to sweeten the deal; Ars Technica, 10/23/09
Jacqui Cheng, Ars Technica; Hulu to charge for content, but needs to sweeten the deal:
Would you start paying Hulu for content that you previously got for free? The company's backers sure hope so, and they want to stick some content behind a paywall as early as 2010. "It's time to start getting paid for broadcast content online," said one exec.
"The free-for-all days of Hulu may soon be over. News Corp. executives indicated (again) this week that the free, ad-supported model wasn't bringing home enough bacon and that the company was preparing to start charging users for content as soon as 2010. This news comes as a harsh reality check to dedicated Hulu fans, and Hulu will have to offer them more than just a browser-based stream if the company wants people to start forking over money.
"I think a free model is a very difficult way to capture the value of our content. I think what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value," News Corp. Deputy Chairman Chase Carey said at the B&C OnScreen summit this week. "Hulu concurs with that; it needs to evolve to have a meaningful subscription model as part of its business.""
http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/10/hulu-will-have-to-add-benefits-if-it-wants-to-start-charging.ars
Would you start paying Hulu for content that you previously got for free? The company's backers sure hope so, and they want to stick some content behind a paywall as early as 2010. "It's time to start getting paid for broadcast content online," said one exec.
"The free-for-all days of Hulu may soon be over. News Corp. executives indicated (again) this week that the free, ad-supported model wasn't bringing home enough bacon and that the company was preparing to start charging users for content as soon as 2010. This news comes as a harsh reality check to dedicated Hulu fans, and Hulu will have to offer them more than just a browser-based stream if the company wants people to start forking over money.
"I think a free model is a very difficult way to capture the value of our content. I think what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value," News Corp. Deputy Chairman Chase Carey said at the B&C OnScreen summit this week. "Hulu concurs with that; it needs to evolve to have a meaningful subscription model as part of its business.""
http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/10/hulu-will-have-to-add-benefits-if-it-wants-to-start-charging.ars
EFF defends Yes Men from business rage over climate hoax; Ars Technica, 10/23/09
Matthew Lasar, Ars Technica; EFF defends Yes Men from business rage over climate hoax:
The Electronic Frontier Foundation is telling the US Chamber of Commerce to get over a parody site that turns the trade group's opposition to greenhouse gas legislation on its
"The nation's leading business trade association is not a happy camper about a parody site that has rewritten its controversial position on climate change legislation. Attorneys for the United States Chamber of Commerce have issued a Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown demand notice against the latest prank by the Yes Men, that self-described "genderless, loose-knit association of some 300 impostors worldwide who agree their way into the fortified compounds of commerce"—and then unleash the clowns of public relations war.
But lawyers from the Electronic Frontier Foundation are telling the Chamber to cool off about the whole affair.
What's the furor about? The Yes Men staged a fake press conference this week at the National Press Club in Washington. A "Yes Man" calling himself "Hingo Sembra" actually took to the podium in front of reporters to announce the Chamber's shift on climate change, only to have the whole spectacle turn truly bizarre when a real Chamber official showed up.
According to CBS News, "The press conference began normally but dissolved into a surreal scene when a legitimate Chamber official burst into the event, having heard about it from a reporter, and exclaimed that 'Sembra' was a phony. The activist holding the press conference then called the Chamber official, Eric Wohlschlegel, a fake and demanded his business card."
http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2009/10/eff-tells-business-group-to-get-over-yes-men-hoax.ars
The Electronic Frontier Foundation is telling the US Chamber of Commerce to get over a parody site that turns the trade group's opposition to greenhouse gas legislation on its
"The nation's leading business trade association is not a happy camper about a parody site that has rewritten its controversial position on climate change legislation. Attorneys for the United States Chamber of Commerce have issued a Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown demand notice against the latest prank by the Yes Men, that self-described "genderless, loose-knit association of some 300 impostors worldwide who agree their way into the fortified compounds of commerce"—and then unleash the clowns of public relations war.
But lawyers from the Electronic Frontier Foundation are telling the Chamber to cool off about the whole affair.
What's the furor about? The Yes Men staged a fake press conference this week at the National Press Club in Washington. A "Yes Man" calling himself "Hingo Sembra" actually took to the podium in front of reporters to announce the Chamber's shift on climate change, only to have the whole spectacle turn truly bizarre when a real Chamber official showed up.
According to CBS News, "The press conference began normally but dissolved into a surreal scene when a legitimate Chamber official burst into the event, having heard about it from a reporter, and exclaimed that 'Sembra' was a phony. The activist holding the press conference then called the Chamber official, Eric Wohlschlegel, a fake and demanded his business card."
http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2009/10/eff-tells-business-group-to-get-over-yes-men-hoax.ars
European Internet sinking fast under 3-strikes proposals; Boing Boing, 10/23/09
Cory Doctorow, Boing Boing; European Internet sinking fast under 3-strikes proposals:
"Things look bad for the European Internet: "3 strikes" (the entertainment industry's proposal for a law that requires ISPs to disconnect whole households if one member is accused -- without evidence or trial -- of three copyright infringements) is gaining currency. Efforts to make 3-strikes illegal are being thwarted by the European bureaucracy in the EC.
The Pirate Party, which holds a seat in the European Parliament, proposed legislation that said, essentially, that no one could be disconnected from the Internet without a fair trial. When the proposal when to the European Commission (a group of powerful, unelected bureaucrats who have been heavily lobbied by the entertainment industry), they rewrote it so that disconnection can take place without trial or other due process.
On the national level, France's Constitutional Court have approved the latest version of the French 3-strikes rule, HADOPI, which has created a kind of grudging, joke oversight by the courts (before your family's Internet connection is taken away, a judge gives the order 1-2 minutes' worth of review, and you aren't entitled to counsel and the rules of evidence don't apply -- the NYT called it similar to "traffic court"). Under this rule, there is now a national list of French people who are not allowed to be connected to the Internet; providing them with connectivity is a crime.
The only bright light is that this will play very badly in the national elections coming up in many European jurisdictions; the Swedes, in particular, are likely to kick the hell out of the MPs who voted for criminal sanctions for downloading and replace them with Pirate Party candidates, Greens, and members of other parties with a liberal stance on copyright."
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/10/23/european-internet-si.html
"Things look bad for the European Internet: "3 strikes" (the entertainment industry's proposal for a law that requires ISPs to disconnect whole households if one member is accused -- without evidence or trial -- of three copyright infringements) is gaining currency. Efforts to make 3-strikes illegal are being thwarted by the European bureaucracy in the EC.
The Pirate Party, which holds a seat in the European Parliament, proposed legislation that said, essentially, that no one could be disconnected from the Internet without a fair trial. When the proposal when to the European Commission (a group of powerful, unelected bureaucrats who have been heavily lobbied by the entertainment industry), they rewrote it so that disconnection can take place without trial or other due process.
On the national level, France's Constitutional Court have approved the latest version of the French 3-strikes rule, HADOPI, which has created a kind of grudging, joke oversight by the courts (before your family's Internet connection is taken away, a judge gives the order 1-2 minutes' worth of review, and you aren't entitled to counsel and the rules of evidence don't apply -- the NYT called it similar to "traffic court"). Under this rule, there is now a national list of French people who are not allowed to be connected to the Internet; providing them with connectivity is a crime.
The only bright light is that this will play very badly in the national elections coming up in many European jurisdictions; the Swedes, in particular, are likely to kick the hell out of the MPs who voted for criminal sanctions for downloading and replace them with Pirate Party candidates, Greens, and members of other parties with a liberal stance on copyright."
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/10/23/european-internet-si.html
Canadian Musicians vs. Canadian Recording Industry Spokesperson; Michael Geist Blog, 10/25/09
Michael Geist, Michael Geist Blog; Canadian Musicians vs. Canadian Recording Industry Spokesperson:
"The government continues to play catch-up with the copyright consultation submissions (my submission appeared on Friday). It has just posted two interesting contrasting submissions: the Canadian Music Creators Coalition, actual Canadian musicians who warn against DMCA-style reforms and Don Hogarth, CRIA's communication person, who warns against people who warn against DMCA-style reforms."
http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4483/196/
"The government continues to play catch-up with the copyright consultation submissions (my submission appeared on Friday). It has just posted two interesting contrasting submissions: the Canadian Music Creators Coalition, actual Canadian musicians who warn against DMCA-style reforms and Don Hogarth, CRIA's communication person, who warns against people who warn against DMCA-style reforms."
http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4483/196/
New US Ambassador To Canada Kicks Things Off By Pushing For Bad Copyright Laws; TechDirt, 10/23/09
Mike Masnick, TechDirt; New US Ambassador To Canada Kicks Things Off By Pushing For Bad Copyright Laws:
"So it looks like the "timing" on Barrie McKenna's ridiculous Globe & Mail column spewing a bunch of recording industry propaganda wasn't so random after all. Just after it came out, the new US ambassador to Canada, David Jacobson, made a point of scolding Canada for its copyright laws, and sticking by the decision to put Canada on the "watch list" in the USTR special 301 report. Once again, despite early suggestions that the new administration might actually take an evidence-based approach to intellectual property, it looks it's instead decided to simply act as an enforcer for Hollywood make believe. Too bad."
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091023/0233316649.shtml
"So it looks like the "timing" on Barrie McKenna's ridiculous Globe & Mail column spewing a bunch of recording industry propaganda wasn't so random after all. Just after it came out, the new US ambassador to Canada, David Jacobson, made a point of scolding Canada for its copyright laws, and sticking by the decision to put Canada on the "watch list" in the USTR special 301 report. Once again, despite early suggestions that the new administration might actually take an evidence-based approach to intellectual property, it looks it's instead decided to simply act as an enforcer for Hollywood make believe. Too bad."
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091023/0233316649.shtml
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)