‘Happy Birthday’ Lawyers Target Other Song Copyrights; Bloomberg Law, 6/28/16

Anandashankar Mazumdar, Bloomberg Law; ‘Happy Birthday’ Lawyers Target Other Song Copyrights:

"In April, they filed a complaint over “We Shall Overcome,” the protest song synonymous with the 1960s Civil Rights Movement.

” `We Shall Overcome’ is a profoundly important song,” Rifkin said. ” `Happy Birthday’ is possibly the world’s most famous song, but `We Shall Overcome’ is possibly the world’s most important song. It has a moving appeal to an awful lot of people, and it is a very important piece of music, and we think it’s important that it be given back to the public.”

On June 14, the lawyers filed another complaint, this time over “This Land Is Your Land,” the folk song associated with Depression-era troubadour and political activist Woody Guthrie, who wrote the lyrics to an existing melody. Guthrie’s copyright on the lyrics expired in 1973, the complaint said..."

Restoring Balance to the Copyright Act

As they take on similar cases, Rifkin said he considers the challenge of dubious copyright claims an important part of the copyright system. He and Newman, he said, are trying to hit the balance referred to by Justice Elena Kagan in an opinion in a Supreme Court case involving legal fees in copyright cases.

The purpose of the Copyright Act—”enriching the general public through access to creative works”— is served by “striking a balance between two subsidiary aims: encouraging and rewarding authors’ creations while also enabling others to build on that work,” Kagan said."

Huckabee’s anti-gay-marriage rally leads to copyright suit, $25,000 payment; Ars Technica, 6/27/16

Joe Mullin, Ars Technica; Huckabee’s anti-gay-marriage rally leads to copyright suit, $25,000 payment:

"Now, CNN has reported that Huckabee's campaign ended up paying $25,000 to Sullivan's music company to resolve a copyright infringement lawsuit over the incident. Two payments of $12,500 each appeared on a June 20 document filed with the Federal Election Commission...

Huckabee's campaign didn't give up without a fight, though. In court documents, Huckabee argued that his use of "Eye of the Tiger" was "de minimis" and should be considered fair use. He also said the rally for Davis was a "religious assembly," which further mitigated against a finding of infringement.

This isn't the first time "Eye of the Tiger" has been in the political eye of the storm. Newt Gingrich used the song at rallies for years before getting sued in 2012, when he mounted a presidential bid. He settled for an undisclosed sum. Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney also used the song in 2012, but he quickly stopped after receiving a warning from McGarry."

Flipping Journals to Open Access; Library Journal, 6/22/16

John Parsons, Library Journal; Flipping Journals to Open Access:

"Mandates from governments, funding sources, and institutions, have made the switch to open access all but inevitable. This puts increasing pressure on traditional journals to change, a process commonly known as “flipping,” but a new study reveals the many ways to convert from subscriptions to OA.

Publishers are understandably cautious. Paid subscription models were established before the advent of the Internet and OA, to support the many services required to produce a peer-reviewed article. Every traditional publisher must navigate the transition with care—and on the basis of its own, unique circumstances."

Illuminating the ‘Dark’ Web and Content Monitoring; New York Times, 6/24/16

Ted Loos, New York Times; Illuminating the ‘Dark’ Web and Content Monitoring:

"Eva and Franco Mattes — married Brooklyn artists and “hacktivists” — use those ideas metaphorically, peeling back the surface of what they call the “sanitized” internet to reveal its murkier side: the world of content monitoring and the elusive individuals who are tasked with tracking and removing offensive material online.

Their latest exhibition, “Abuse Standards Violations,” on view at London’s Carroll/Fletcher gallery until Aug. 27, is a journey into what Ben Vickers, a London curator at the Serpentine Galleries and fan of their work, called “the dark, morbid heart of the internet.”"

Moonshine Maker Loses ‘Kentucky’ in Legal Battle With University; New York Times, 6/23/16

Sheryl Gay Stolberg, New York Times; Moonshine Maker Loses ‘Kentucky’ in Legal Battle With University:

"The university — whose Wildcats basketball team brings in millions of dollars in revenue each year — says it does; in 1997, it trademarked the word “Kentucky” for use on clothing. When Mr. Fultz opened shop last October in his home city, Whitesburg, and tried to trademark his business name, the university tried to block him from doing so for apparel. Officials said they mostly hoped to open negotiations with Mr. Fultz to keep him from marketing “Kentucky Mist Moonshine” T-shirts in the school’s signature colors of royal blue and white.

Instead, Mr. Fultz filed suit. But on Thursday, a federal court in Lexington sided with the university and dismissed his case.

In a 32-page ruling, Judge Danny C. Reeves of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky accepted the university’s arguments that it was immune from being sued, and that Kentucky Mist had no standing to bring the case."

‘Star Trek: Axanar’ Producers Fire Back at ‘Draconian’ Fan Film Guidelines; Comic Book Resources, 6/24/16

Kevin Melrose, Comic Book Resources; ‘Star Trek: Axanar’ Producers Fire Back at ‘Draconian’ Fan Film Guidelines:

"The producers of “Star Trek: Axanar” have responded to new fan film guidelines established by Paramount Pictures and CBS, calling them “Draconian” and stifling to fandom.

“We have been asking for guidelines for years,” producers said in a tweet. “CBS decided to make those guidelines Draconian.”"

Difference between trademark, copyright and patent; YourStory, 6/24/16

Nikita Bhatia, YourStory.com; Difference between trademark, copyright and patent:

"Intellectual property is a vast and complex term. Many a time people are confused or have incorrectly used the terms in intellectual property law. They have spoken of “copyrighting” an idea or even “patenting” a book! To understand these terms, it is essential to know what is Intellectual Property and what all does it entail."

Free Led Zeppelin: “This is about music, it’s not about sound”; Salon, 6/22/16

Scott Timberg, Salon; Free Led Zeppelin: “This is about music, it’s not about sound” :

"The federal court trial considering whether Led Zeppelin stole from a Spirit song for its ubiquitous “Stairway to Heaven” is moving toward its conclusion. Zeppelin singer Robert Plant took the stand Tuesday, saying he did not remember hearing the instrumental “Taurus” and describing in detail the way he wrote “Stairway” with guitarist Jimmy Page.

But the case is about a legal concept as much as musical ones – the plagiarism of intellectual property. Salon spoke to the Charles Cronin, who teaches at USC’s Gould School of Law and has written extensively on musical plagiarism. He’s also founder of the Music Copyright Infringement Resource, now housed at the university."

Led Zeppelin Wins Copyright Infringement Suit Over Opening Lick of 'Stairway to Heaven'; ABC News, 6/23/16

Sherene Tagharobi and Lesley Messer, ABC News; Led Zeppelin Wins Copyright Infringement Suit Over Opening Lick of 'Stairway to Heaven' :

"A jury today found that Led Zeppelin had not plagiarized the opening riff of "Stairway to Heaven."

After a day of deliberation, the ruling came back that there was no copyright infringement. An eight-person jury delivered the verdict, ruling there was no "extrinsic similarity between Spirit's 'Taurus' and 'Stairway,'" following five days of testimony from music experts, a former Spirit band member and the surviving members of Led Zeppelin."

Star Trek Fan Film Guidelines Announced; StarTrek.com, 6/23/16

CBS & Paramount, StarTrek.com; Star Trek Fan Film Guidelines Announced:

"Dear Star Trek fans,

Star Trek fandom is like no other.

Your support, enthusiasm and passion are the reasons that Star Trek has flourished for five decades and will continue long into the future. You are the reason the original Star Trek series was rescued and renewed in 1968, and the reason it has endured as an iconic and multi-generational phenomenon that has spawned seven television series and 13 movies.

Throughout the years, many of you have expressed your love for the franchise through creative endeavors such as fan films. So today, we want to show our appreciation by bringing fan films back to their roots.

The heart of these fan films has always been about expressing one’s love and passion for Star Trek. They have been about fan creativity and sharing unique stories with other fans to show admiration for the TV shows and movies. These films are a labor of love for any fan with desire, imagination and a camera.

We want to support this innovation and encourage celebrations of this beloved cultural phenomenon. It is with this perspective in mind that we are introducing a set of guidelines at Star Trek Fan Films.

Thank you for your ongoing and steadfast enthusiasm and support, which ensure that Star Trek will continue to inspire generations to come.

CBS and Paramount Pictures"

China Smartphone Makers Snap Up Patents in Fight for Market Dominance; Wall Street Journal, 6/20/16

Juro Osawa, Wall Street Journal; China Smartphone Makers Snap Up Patents in Fight for Market Dominance:

"China’s smartphone makers increasingly are turning to patents as ammunition as they try to reel in global leaders Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co."

Exhibit Explores Ancient Roman 'Designer' Labels, Trademarks; Associated Press via ABC News, 6/16/16

Frances D'Emilio, Associated Press via ABC News; Exhibit Explores Ancient Roman 'Designer' Labels, Trademarks:

"In an ancient twist to today's Made-in-Italy labeling, Romans of some 2,000 years ago took to branding with zeal, putting names, trademarks and other identifying details with meticulous care on items including tableware, plumbing pipes and lead ammunition for slingshots."

Taylor Swift Wants YouTube To Treat Artists More Fairly, Too; Huffington Post, 6/20/16

Sara Boboltz, Huffington Post; Taylor Swift Wants YouTube To Treat Artists More Fairly, Too:

"Taylor Swift, Sir Paul McCartney and U2 are among those set to join the music industry’s increasingly loud battle with the world’s largest music service: YouTube. The musicians hope to plead the case in a series of ads this week that it is time to reform a 17-year-old law known as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act that they believe puts tech giants before musicians.

Enacted way back in 1998, the DMCA offers certain protections — sometimes called “safe harbor” — for websites hosting copyrighted content. Under the law, websites like YouTube can serve copyrighted music uploaded by ordinary users so long as the site takes it down when the rights holder asks. In an open letter to be published Tuesday in D.C.-based publications The Hill, Politico and Roll Call, dozens of artists and major record labels call for reforming the DMCA, according to multiple reports.

Many major record labels are currently involved in contract renegotiations with YouTube, or will be shortly, meaning the letter will make its debut at a key time. Those same labels believe that the DMCA gives big tech companies like YouTube a leg up in negotiating fees — meaning less revenue is making its way back to music creators. And that doesn’t make artists very happy, either. Music industry executives call that difference between actual profit from user-generated content sites and estimated potential profit a “value gap.” And they’re out to close it."

Led Zeppelin faces copyright case for ‘Stairway to Heaven’; PBS NewsHour, 6/19/16

[Podcast and Transcript] Phil Hirschkorn, PBS NewsHour; Led Zeppelin faces copyright case for ‘Stairway to Heaven’ :

"This week in Los Angeles federal court, a jury began hearing evidence and testimony on whether rock band Led Zeppelin may have lifted part of their iconic song, “Stairway to Heaven.” At stake is the band’s reputation and millions of dollars. NewsHour Weekend’s Phil Hirschkorn reports."

Progress Worth Noting: Congress Strengthens The Freedom Of Information Act And The Public’s Right To Know; Huffington Post, 6/17/16

Dorothy Samuels, Huffington Post; Progress Worth Noting: Congress Strengthens The Freedom Of Information Act And The Public’s Right To Know:

"In a gloomy news week dominated by the slaughter of 49 people at a gay nightclub in Orlando, Fla. and its aftermath, it is understandable that Congressional approval of unrelated legislation easing access to government records has not garnered tons of public attention. But Monday’s House passage of the bipartisan Freedom of Information Improvement Act previously approved by the Senate (also by a unanimous vote) now sends to the White House a major FOIA reform bill and blast against Washington’s culture of unwarranted government secrecy. President Obama has said he’ll sign the measure — a fitting way to mark the 50th anniversary of the nation’s premier transparency law this July 4th.

The bill’s foremost accomplishment is that it will embed in federal law a “presumption of openness,” making it clear that “sunshine, not secrecy, is the default setting of our government” and “government information belongs in the hands of the people,” as Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the Senate’s foremost Democratic champion of the legislation puts it...

The idea is to make it harder for agency officials deny release of government information sought under the FOIA. The “presumption of openness” was first laid out as executive branch policy by President Bill Clinton, only to be reversed by his successor, President George W. Bush. President Obama reinstated it in 2009 as one of his first acts upon taking office, but his administration has been criticized for straying from the commitment to openness in practice, even lobbying against a similar version of the legislation that nearly passed both houses of Congress two years ago."

Four Big Questions to Help You Understand the Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act; National Law Review, 6/16/16

William A. Nolan, National Law Review; Four Big Questions to Help You Understand the Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act:

"On May 11, President Obama signed into law the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA), effective immediately. Previously, trade secret law has consisted almost entirely of 48 states’ versions of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA), so a federal law is a significant development. Almost all businesses have at least some confidential information that would qualify as a trade secret, so it is important for businesses and their lawyers to understand what this new federal law means and does not mean. We do that here with four broad questions."

What is a Trademark? Is Your Business Ready for one?; Small Business Trends, 6/16/16

Nellie Akalp, Small Business Trends; What is a Trademark? Is Your Business Ready for one? :

"It takes a minimum of several months — sometimes close to a year — to register a trademark. While you may be at the mercy of the backlog at the USPTO, there are a few things you can do to make sure your application is processed as quickly as possible. First, the more distinctive your mark is, the easier it will be to trademark. A descriptive or generic name like “Pretty Flowers” will most likely be rejected.

In addition, performing a very thorough name search upfront is the most important thing you can do to speed along your trademark application and minimize the chance of rejection. Your application will be rejected (and you’ll lose your application fee) if the USPTO finds another business is already using a similar mark in commerce.

Searching the USPTO’s online database is a first step toward finding any similar and potentially conflicting marks. But, if you’re serious about your trademark application, you should also perform a thorough search that includes state trademark databases and business directories. That’s because a business can enjoy common law rights without formally registering. You can have a trademark lawyer or online legal filing service help you with this important search."

Beijing Says Apple's iPhone 6 Violates Chinese Design Patent; NPR, 6/17/16

Alina Selyukh, NPR; Beijing Says Apple's iPhone 6 Violates Chinese Design Patent:

"Apple has hit a new snag in China: Beijing's intellectual property agency has ruled that the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus violate a design patent by one of China's own smartphone-makers.

Authorities found that this older generation of iPhones looks too similar to a phone, the 100C, made by a company called Shenzhen Baili. As a result, Apple was ordered to stop selling the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus in Beijing.

However, Apple says it appealed the order and the ruling has been stayed for the duration of the appeal — meaning that for now, the sales will continue.

Curiously, the order did not apply to the latest generation of iPhones, the 6s and 6s Plus, even though they closely resemble the older phones."

Appeals Court Gives Internet Service Providers Big Relief in Copyright Disputes; Hollywood Reporter, 6/18/16

Eriq Gardner, Hollywood Reporter; Appeals Court Gives Internet Service Providers Big Relief in Copyright Disputes:

"On Thursday, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals issued a long- and eagerly-awaited opinion in a case brought by major record labels against the video-sharing site Vimeo. The decision will be cheered by those in the tech community by providing some immunization from copyright liability.

Capitol Records and others sued the Barry Diller-owned Vimeo in 2009 — a virtual generation ago in the digital world. At the time, Viacom was fighting with YouTube over how to interpret the safe harbor provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which allows ISPs to escape copyright claims so long as they remove infringements expeditiously and not have actual knowledge of infringements on their networks. The since-settled YouTube controversy slowed the Vimeo case, which dealt with videos posted of the "lip dub" variety, showing users who choreographed elaborate lip-synching spectacles to popular music. Ultimately, Capitol Records et. al. v. Vimeo figures to be just as important as Viacom v. YouTube...

The case is now remanded back to the district court to sort out, but the decision may save Vimeo tens of millions of dollars in liability, and more importantly, become a new guiding post for copyright owners and digital service providers. Here's the full opinion."

You Will Never Unsee This Wondrously Strange Fake Japanese Advertisement for Donald Trump; Slate, 6/16/16

Katy Waldman, Slate; You Will Never Unsee This Wondrously Strange Fake Japanese Advertisement for Donald Trump:

"Mike Diva is, per his Facebook page, a “MAKER OF VIDEOS/MUSIC/MEMES/DREAMS” and he has bequeathed the pre-apocalyptic world its eighth wonder, a dizzying, sorbet-hued phantasmagoria that gestures toward the coming end times. It is called “Japanese Donald Trump Commercial”...

We could not resist getting Diva, whose real name is Mike Dahlquist, on the phone...

How long did it take you to make the video?

Dahlquist: All told, about a month and a half. I’m really lucky my friends are talented and willing to work for free, because of course we had zero budget. The actress was a friend of mine, perfect for the part—her hair was already like that and everything."

Everything you need to know about Led Zeppelin's 'Stairway to Heaven' copyright infringement trial; Entertainment Weekly, 6/16/16

Eric Renner Brown, Entertainment Weekly; Everything you need to know about Led Zeppelin's 'Stairway to Heaven' copyright infringement trial:

"This week, Robert Plant and Jimmy Page of Led Zeppelin attended Los Angeles court for the infringement trial aiming to determine whether or not the iconic band relied too heavily on the song of one of their classic rock contemporaries when writing “Stairway to Heaven.” The convoluted saga could result in a change of credit and reallocated royalties — and at the very least it’s just the latest in Zeppelin’s decades-long struggle with crediting the influences behind some of their biggest hits. Read on for everything you need to know about the case."

Supreme Court Rules on Legal Fees in Copyright Cases; New York Times, 6/16/16

Adam Liptak, New York Times; Supreme Court Rules on Legal Fees in Copyright Cases:

"The Supreme Court on Thursday unanimously ruled that a Thai student who in 2013 won a copyright case involving imported textbooks should have another chance to persuade a lower court that the textbook’s publisher should pay his legal fees...

Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the court, said whether the losing side’s position was objectively reasonable should play a major role in the analysis. But she said the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in New York, and the district courts it supervises, may have placed nearly dispositive weight on that one factor.

Justice Kagan said other considerations — including motivation, deterrence and compensation — must also play a role in the analysis. But she appeared to suggest that the student, Supap Kirtsaeng, was unlikely to prevail under the correct standard."

Panels Brainstorm Ideas On Innovation And Drug Access; Intellectual Property Watch, 6/15/16

Catherine Saez, Intellectual Property Watch; Panels Brainstorm Ideas On Innovation And Drug Access:

"The Harvard Global Health Institute and the Berkman Center for Internet and Society & Global Access in Action co-organised an event on practical strategies to expand access to medicine and promote innovation on 13 June. The event was partly webcast.

In his introductory remarks, Ashish Jha, K.T. Li professor of international health, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and director of the Harvard Global Health Institute, talked about the tension between two communities with two competing sets of ideas.

The first set, he said, is the real practical need for more innovation for treating diseases and diagnostic tests. However, innovation fundamentally is expensive, “and there is no shortcut that we know of to make innovation happen without anybody’s forces,” he said.

The opposing factor, he said, is that a very large proportion of the world’s population that cannot afford to pay for the innovation. “The idea that innovation would only benefit those who can afford to pay for it is an idea that we feel is both from a moral, economic, and intellectual perspective, unsustainable.”

“We have to move forward beyond this tension, beyond this point of contention … and find practical solutions” that both support innovation yet ensure that there is broad access, he said."

Mr. Modi, Don't Patent Cow Urine; New York Times, 6/16/16

Achal Prabhala and Sudhir Krishnaswamy, New York Times; Mr. Modi, Don't Patent Cow Urine:

"The B.J.P. government released India’s first National Intellectual Property Rights Policy last month, and it is dangerously misguided. Although the paper reaffirms the basic tenets of India’s admirably farsighted patent laws, it also calls for protecting traditional remedies like cow urine. Taken to its logical conclusion, this policy could open the door to many more exceptions, playing into the hands of patent-happy international pharmaceutical companies.

Big Pharma justifies aggressive patenting by claiming that profit-making drives invention by giving labs and companies an incentive to invest in research. Indian law takes the opposite view: Higher standards for legal protection leave more room for innovation. Unlike many other countries, India does not allow patents for natural substances, traditional remedies, frivolous inventions or marginal innovations.

This is a good thing — a great thing, in fact. Having fewer patents means more competition for more generic drugs, which means more affordable medicine for more people. Imatinib, a drug used to treat a form of leukemia, is available in India at about one-tenth the price it costs in much of the world. In 2000, when the only anti-retroviral drugs for HIV/AIDS available were produced by Western companies, the annual cost of treatment was about $10,000. The price has dropped to about $350, at least in the developing world, thanks to generic equivalents that were developed in India.

Naturally, all this drives Big Pharma mad. Its business model relies largely on patenting small tweaks to existing technologies, which multiplies financial returns with only minimal investment in research."

Paramount Says 'Star Trek' Fan Film Lawsuit Lives On; Hollywood Reporter, 6/16/16

Eriq Gardner, Hollywood Reporter; Paramount Says 'Star Trek' Fan Film Lawsuit Lives On:

"The two studios filed a copyright infringement lawsuit at the very end of 2015, and over objections that the Star Trek rights-owners couldn't really copyright elements like the Klingon language or the pointy Vulcan ears, a judge rejected a motion to dismiss. The legal dispute over a project hyped as a would-be studio-quality film that's set before Captain James. T. Kirk's voyage on the U.S.S. Enterprise has commanded attention in large part because the studios have either tolerated or encouraged fan-made works through the years.

In mid-May, during a promotional event for Star Trek Beyond, Abrams raised the hopes of many by hinting the lawsuit would be over soon...

So far, that hasn't turned out to be the case."