Anandashankar Mazumdar, Bloomberg Law; Play-Doh Scent Registration May Serve As Trademark Model
"Trademark attorneys usually handle registrations online. But the
lawyer for toy maker Hasbro Inc. faced a problem that no computer could
solve.
Lawyer Catherine M.C. Farrelly was trying to get a
trademark registration for the iconic scent of Play-Doh, the modeling
compound that has been sold as a children’s toy since 1956. The Patent
and Trademark Office requires a specimen of any trademark, so the scent
had to be sent. Farrelly, of Frankfurt, Kurnit, Klein & Selz PC, New
York, told Bloomberg Law that she sent the application in February 2017
with a note that a box of Play-Doh was on its way by overnight
delivery.
Hasbro Inc.’s success in getting a trademark
registration in May 2018 for the smell of Play-Doh might serve as a
model for lawyers tasked with securing aroma-related trademarks,
trademark lawyers told Bloomberg Law."
Sunday, June 24, 2018
The sudden rush of vulgar trademarks; The Boston Globe, June 23, 2018
The sudden rush of vulgar trademarks
"There are now at least three different kinds of marks which can be registered without challenge. The first category includes marks that comprise, well, hate speech — the name of the pro football team in Washington, as an example. The second falls into Tam’s context — self-referential marks.
But the third group is different. Like a team playing defense, these trademark owners seek to register marks to keep the rest of the public from doing so.
In perhaps the most surprising result of the court’s ruling, the applicants for several of the most offensive terms did so not to sell merchandise, but to stop others from doing the same."
"There are now at least three different kinds of marks which can be registered without challenge. The first category includes marks that comprise, well, hate speech — the name of the pro football team in Washington, as an example. The second falls into Tam’s context — self-referential marks.
But the third group is different. Like a team playing defense, these trademark owners seek to register marks to keep the rest of the public from doing so.
In perhaps the most surprising result of the court’s ruling, the applicants for several of the most offensive terms did so not to sell merchandise, but to stop others from doing the same."
This guy's invention got U.S. Patent No. 10 million; Marketplace, June 19, 2018
; This guy's invention got U.S. Patent No. 10 million
"Today marks a milestone of in the American innovation economy. Back in 1836, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued patent No.1 under the current numbering system. It took 155 years to get up to patent No. 5 million and then just another 27 years to issue 5 million more. Patent number No. 10 million was issued this afternoon for something called "Coherent Ladar Using Intra-Pixel Quadrature Detection." The technology is owned by Raytheon, and it was invented by Joseph Marron, a principal engineering fellow at the company's Space and Airborne Systems division. He talked with Marketplace host Kai Ryssdal about his invention. The following is an edited transcript of their conversation..."
"Today marks a milestone of in the American innovation economy. Back in 1836, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued patent No.1 under the current numbering system. It took 155 years to get up to patent No. 5 million and then just another 27 years to issue 5 million more. Patent number No. 10 million was issued this afternoon for something called "Coherent Ladar Using Intra-Pixel Quadrature Detection." The technology is owned by Raytheon, and it was invented by Joseph Marron, a principal engineering fellow at the company's Space and Airborne Systems division. He talked with Marketplace host Kai Ryssdal about his invention. The following is an edited transcript of their conversation..."
Nathan Myhrvold: ‘Nasa doesn’t want to admit it’s wrong about asteroids’; The Observer via The Guardian, June 24, 2018
Zoe Corbyn, The Observer via The Guardian; Nathan Myhrvold: ‘Nasa doesn’t want to admit it’s wrong about asteroids’
"In 2000, you left Microsoft and set up Intellectual Ventures, which primarily buys and licenses patents. The business is often vilified as one of the world’s biggest “patent trolls”. Why do you think people find it so loathsome?
I fundamentally think what we do is good. It is hard for me to get too worked up about figuring out why it is bad. Any patent holder who enforces their rights gets called a patent troll. Silicon Valley feels very threatened by anything that could challenge its authority. If you are one of the big companies, like Google or Apple, almost no one can challenge you in the market that you’re in. But if somebody has a patent, they can ask for a bunch of money. The more you can get a return from an invention, the better off the world will be. It will lead to more inventions being funded and more inventing...
President Trump is going after China’s intellectual property theft. Given your experience, can he succeed in curbing it?
The theft of intellectual property by Chinese companies is a very serious issue. It’s not just private companies in China or little companies. A large amount of it is state-owned enterprise. So, it really is the Chinese government doing it. Exactly how to solve that issue, I don’t know. You need the Chinese government to be very serious about it, but so far they haven’t been. In my experience in business, you mostly do better with negotiating in quiet diplomacy, not with brinksmanship. But I’ve never built luxury hotels and golf courses. Maybe it is different there."
"In 2000, you left Microsoft and set up Intellectual Ventures, which primarily buys and licenses patents. The business is often vilified as one of the world’s biggest “patent trolls”. Why do you think people find it so loathsome?
I fundamentally think what we do is good. It is hard for me to get too worked up about figuring out why it is bad. Any patent holder who enforces their rights gets called a patent troll. Silicon Valley feels very threatened by anything that could challenge its authority. If you are one of the big companies, like Google or Apple, almost no one can challenge you in the market that you’re in. But if somebody has a patent, they can ask for a bunch of money. The more you can get a return from an invention, the better off the world will be. It will lead to more inventions being funded and more inventing...
President Trump is going after China’s intellectual property theft. Given your experience, can he succeed in curbing it?
The theft of intellectual property by Chinese companies is a very serious issue. It’s not just private companies in China or little companies. A large amount of it is state-owned enterprise. So, it really is the Chinese government doing it. Exactly how to solve that issue, I don’t know. You need the Chinese government to be very serious about it, but so far they haven’t been. In my experience in business, you mostly do better with negotiating in quiet diplomacy, not with brinksmanship. But I’ve never built luxury hotels and golf courses. Maybe it is different there."
Article 13: Europe's hotly debated revamp of copyright law, explained; CNet, June 22, 2018
Katie Collins, CNet; Article 13: Europe's hotly debated revamp of copyright law, explained
"The European Union is trying to pass a hotly debated law on copyright. The European Copyright Directive has been two years in the making, and on June 20, the European Parliament's legal affairs committee voted to approve the draft legislation.
The vote happened less than a month after Europe's last big piece of internet-related legislation -- the General Data Privacy Regulation (GDPR) -- kicked in.
Both the Copyright Directive and GDPR could dramatically impact and change things about the internet as we know it. But they also differ significantly, not just in scope, but also in how they're viewed and received by the world beyond Brussels."
"The European Union is trying to pass a hotly debated law on copyright. The European Copyright Directive has been two years in the making, and on June 20, the European Parliament's legal affairs committee voted to approve the draft legislation.
The vote happened less than a month after Europe's last big piece of internet-related legislation -- the General Data Privacy Regulation (GDPR) -- kicked in.
Both the Copyright Directive and GDPR could dramatically impact and change things about the internet as we know it. But they also differ significantly, not just in scope, but also in how they're viewed and received by the world beyond Brussels."
Europe Approves 'Wildly Dangerous' Copyright Rules; Forbes, June 20, 2018
Emma Woollacott, Forbes; Europe Approves 'Wildly Dangerous' Copyright Rules
The move raises the specter of a 'tax' on linking to other sites and automated censorship of material identified as violating copyright. However, despite fierce opposition, the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) has approved the controversial Articles 11 and 13 of the Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Copyright in the Digital Single Market.
Article 11, narrowly approved by 13 to 12 votes, requires any site linking to a third-party site with a snippet to adhere to an astonishing 28 separate copyright laws, or else pay for a license to provide the link...
Article 13, meanwhile, was approved by 15 votes to 10 and requires any site which allows users to post material to check it all against a database of copyrighted works, and even to pay for the privilege of accessing the database."
"The whole internet is set to be subject
to ContentID-type filtering in Europe, thanks to new copyright proposals
that have been voted through by the European Parliament.
The move raises the specter of a 'tax' on linking to other sites and automated censorship of material identified as violating copyright. However, despite fierce opposition, the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) has approved the controversial Articles 11 and 13 of the Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Copyright in the Digital Single Market.
Article 11, narrowly approved by 13 to 12 votes, requires any site linking to a third-party site with a snippet to adhere to an astonishing 28 separate copyright laws, or else pay for a license to provide the link...
Article 13, meanwhile, was approved by 15 votes to 10 and requires any site which allows users to post material to check it all against a database of copyrighted works, and even to pay for the privilege of accessing the database."
Friday, June 15, 2018
Protests greet Brussels copyright reform plan; BBC News, June 15, 2018
BBC News; Protests greet Brussels copyright reform plan
"The vote on the Copyright Directive comes before the European Parliament on 20 June.
It aims to rebalance copyright controls for the net age but critics say it is will stifle freedom of expression.
Net veterans have signed an open letter against the directive and others have made tools to aid lobbying efforts."
"The vote on the Copyright Directive comes before the European Parliament on 20 June.
It aims to rebalance copyright controls for the net age but critics say it is will stifle freedom of expression.
Net veterans have signed an open letter against the directive and others have made tools to aid lobbying efforts."
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Copyright in tattoos - a prickly legal question; Lexology, June 4, 2018
Nicole Smalberger, Adams & Adams; Lexology; Copyright in tattoos - a prickly legal question
[Kip Currier: Posted this story today for my IP and "Open" Movements course. Tattoo-related copyright issues have fast become a topic of fascination--and often, surprise--for the inked and non-inked...]
"Would it ever occur to you that a third party might be able to claim rights in your skin? In the case of art that has been inked into your skin, namely tattoo art, that may well be the case.
A tattoo is an artistic work. If it is original and reduced to a material form (which it very arguably is when it is inked into your skin), copyright subsists. In the case of artistic works, it is the artist or creator of the work who owns the copyright, namely the tattoo artist and not the person on whom the tattoo appears, irrespective of the fact that the latter has paid for his/her tattoo. In short, when you pay your tattoo artist, you pay for the tattoo, not the copyright subsisting in it.
This issue has come up for legal consideration in the United States..."
10 million patents: A celebration of American innovation; Director's Forum: A Blog from USPTO's Leadership, Thursday, June 14, 2018
Andrei Iancu, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Director's Forum: A Blog from USPTO's Leadership
10 million patents: A celebration of American innovation
"On June 19, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will issue patent number 10 million—a remarkable achievement for the United States of America and our agency. More than just a number, this patent represents one of ten million steps on a continuum of human accomplishment launched when our Founding Fathers provided for intellectual property protection in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 of our Constitution.
Appropriately, patent number 10 million will be the first issued with a new patent cover design, which we unveiled in March at South by Southwest in Austin, Texas. It was created by a team of USPTO graphic designers including Rick Heddleston, Theresa Verigan, and led by Jeff Isaacs."
10 million patents: A celebration of American innovation
"On June 19, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will issue patent number 10 million—a remarkable achievement for the United States of America and our agency. More than just a number, this patent represents one of ten million steps on a continuum of human accomplishment launched when our Founding Fathers provided for intellectual property protection in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 of our Constitution.
Appropriately, patent number 10 million will be the first issued with a new patent cover design, which we unveiled in March at South by Southwest in Austin, Texas. It was created by a team of USPTO graphic designers including Rick Heddleston, Theresa Verigan, and led by Jeff Isaacs."
10 Million Patents; Patents Through History, U.S. Patent and Trademark office (USPTO), 2018
Patents Through History, U.S. Patent and Trademark office (USPTO); 10 Million Patents
"The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will issue the 10 millionth utility patent in summer 2018. This milestone of human ingenuity perhaps exceeds even the Founding Fathers’ expectations when they called for a patent system in the Constitution to “promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts.” Follow the timeline below for important moments, notable inventors, changing patent designs, and other interesting facts over more than two centuries of innovation in America."
"The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will issue the 10 millionth utility patent in summer 2018. This milestone of human ingenuity perhaps exceeds even the Founding Fathers’ expectations when they called for a patent system in the Constitution to “promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts.” Follow the timeline below for important moments, notable inventors, changing patent designs, and other interesting facts over more than two centuries of innovation in America."
“We rely on a quilt of rights”: inside Starbucks’ trademark strategy"; World Trademark Review, June 14, 2018
World Trademark Review;
"To counter rampant infringement, the company relies on “a quilt of rights”, including trademark, patent, copyright and design rights, and will often initiate claims that include more than one type of intellectual property. However, before initiating claims, a number of factors are considered. “The team is good about checking in with each other, to ensure consistency in our approach across the globe,” Oktay explains. “We have developed a reputation as vigilant enforcers of our brand rights, but we temper our enforcement with soft approaches in most cases. Most infringement can be resolved amicably in our experience, and a soft approach helps.”
The team comprises four lawyers and eight paralegals, all of whom are based in Seattle, with the exception of one lawyer in Shanghai. “Nearly half of our global enforcement – nearly 1,200 matters – occurs in China, so having a lawyer there is necessary.” As to the characteristics of the team, Oktay is proud that the company hires bright people who are dedicated to its mission. “The paralegals, who handle an enormous volume of work, are truly outstanding at what they do. And, a sense of humour is paramount to success in this group!”"
“We rely on a quilt of rights”: inside Starbucks’ trademark strategy"
"To counter rampant infringement, the company relies on “a quilt of rights”, including trademark, patent, copyright and design rights, and will often initiate claims that include more than one type of intellectual property. However, before initiating claims, a number of factors are considered. “The team is good about checking in with each other, to ensure consistency in our approach across the globe,” Oktay explains. “We have developed a reputation as vigilant enforcers of our brand rights, but we temper our enforcement with soft approaches in most cases. Most infringement can be resolved amicably in our experience, and a soft approach helps.”
The team comprises four lawyers and eight paralegals, all of whom are based in Seattle, with the exception of one lawyer in Shanghai. “Nearly half of our global enforcement – nearly 1,200 matters – occurs in China, so having a lawyer there is necessary.” As to the characteristics of the team, Oktay is proud that the company hires bright people who are dedicated to its mission. “The paralegals, who handle an enormous volume of work, are truly outstanding at what they do. And, a sense of humour is paramount to success in this group!”"
Expert in Native American intellectual property joins ASU Law Indian Legal Program; Arizona State University, June 11, 2018
Arizona State University; Expert
in Native American intellectual property joins ASU Law Indian Legal Program
"In 2007, [Trevor Reed] moved to New York and enrolled at Columbia, beginning a decade-plus of music-inspired study that would result in three master’s degrees, a PhD and a Juris Doctor. He initially went to Columbia hoping to break into the music industry, figuring his best shot at a career in the arts would require being in either New York or Los Angeles.
“When I got there, it opened up so many new issues for me,” Reed said. “It just so happens that Columbia owns this massive archive of Native American musical recordings that I don’t know if anybody had really ever heard about. When I learned about that, it sparked an interest in wanting to return music and other types of archival collections, artifacts and other types of intellectual property back to Native American tribes.”
That led to the Hopi Music Repatriation Project, a joint project of the Hopi Tribe and Columbia University, which Reed began leading as a master’s degree student. Think Indiana Jones, the fictitious archaeologist and university professor, but the complete opposite. Instead of “Raiders of the Lost Ark,” plundering wondrous works from indigenous cultures, it was “Returners of the Lost Art.” The project focused not only on returning recordings and rights, but also working with tribal leaders, educators and activists to develop contemporary uses for the materials.
“I stayed on at Columbia well after my business degree had finished, and I joined the PhD program in ethnomusicology, which is essentially the anthropology of music,” Reed said. “And we just set to work on this project, and it carried through law school, and I was able to refine my work in copyright and cultural property. It’s been an interesting ride.”"
“When I got there, it opened up so many new issues for me,” Reed said. “It just so happens that Columbia owns this massive archive of Native American musical recordings that I don’t know if anybody had really ever heard about. When I learned about that, it sparked an interest in wanting to return music and other types of archival collections, artifacts and other types of intellectual property back to Native American tribes.”
That led to the Hopi Music Repatriation Project, a joint project of the Hopi Tribe and Columbia University, which Reed began leading as a master’s degree student. Think Indiana Jones, the fictitious archaeologist and university professor, but the complete opposite. Instead of “Raiders of the Lost Ark,” plundering wondrous works from indigenous cultures, it was “Returners of the Lost Art.” The project focused not only on returning recordings and rights, but also working with tribal leaders, educators and activists to develop contemporary uses for the materials.
“I stayed on at Columbia well after my business degree had finished, and I joined the PhD program in ethnomusicology, which is essentially the anthropology of music,” Reed said. “And we just set to work on this project, and it carried through law school, and I was able to refine my work in copyright and cultural property. It’s been an interesting ride.”"
Europe's New Copyright Rules Will Be Devastating to the Internet as We Know It; Motherboard, June 14, 2018
Karl Bode, Motherboard; Europe's New Copyright Rules Will Be Devastating to the Internet as We Know It
"The formal death of net neutrality and the AT&T-Time Warner merger have received plenty of justified attention this week for the numerous ways they will negatively impact free speech and internet competition. But activists, startups, and businesses alike warn that a new copyright proposal out of the European Union has the potential to cause even greater damage to the internet as we know it.
The EU proposal in question is an attempt to shore up existing problems with EU copyright law. But the poorly crafted nature of the effort could have a profoundly negative impact on everything from your ability to share hot memes to the survival of new startups."
Sunday, June 10, 2018
5 Common Copyright Misconceptions Held by Photographers; PetaPixel, June 6, 2018
Allen Murabayashi, PetaPixel;
5 Common Copyright Misconceptions Held by Photographers
"The most recent version of the Copyright Law of the United States (December 2016) weighs in at a whopping 354 pages. And while there are areas of ambiguity, the basics and benefits of copyright registration for photographers are well-documented. Unfortunately, well-documented doesn’t mean well-understood, so we asked attorney (and former photo rep) Leslie Burns to weigh in on a number of common copyright misconceptions that still persist, and why you should register your copyright."
Friday, June 8, 2018
Pitt Rises to 21st in Annual Global Patent Ranking; University of Pittsburgh, June 7, 2018
Kimberly K. Barlow, University of Pittsburgh; Pitt Rises to 21st in Annual Global Patent Ranking
"The University of Pittsburgh has continued its rise among the Top 100 Worldwide Universities Granted U.S. Utility Patents.
A utility patent, or patent for invention, protects the rights of the creator of a new or improved product, process or machine. Pitt innovators were granted 94 such patents in calendar year 2017 to rank No. 21 worldwide, continuing a three-year ascent in the annual rankings. Pitt ranked No. 35 in the 2015 report and No. 27 in 2016.
The rankings, compiled by the National Academy of Inventors and the Intellectual Property Owners Association, are based on United States Patent and Trademark Office data. The report, which highlights the vital role patents play in university research and innovation, ranks the top 100 universities named as the first assignee on utility patents granted by the office."
"The University of Pittsburgh has continued its rise among the Top 100 Worldwide Universities Granted U.S. Utility Patents.
A utility patent, or patent for invention, protects the rights of the creator of a new or improved product, process or machine. Pitt innovators were granted 94 such patents in calendar year 2017 to rank No. 21 worldwide, continuing a three-year ascent in the annual rankings. Pitt ranked No. 35 in the 2015 report and No. 27 in 2016.
The rankings, compiled by the National Academy of Inventors and the Intellectual Property Owners Association, are based on United States Patent and Trademark Office data. The report, which highlights the vital role patents play in university research and innovation, ranks the top 100 universities named as the first assignee on utility patents granted by the office."
BBC; Copyright law could put end to net memes, June 8, 2018
BBC; Copyright law could put end to net memes
"Digital rights groups are campaigning against the Copyright Directive, which the European Parliament will vote on later this month.
The legislation aims to protect rights-holders in the internet age.
But critics say it misunderstands the way people engage with web content and risks excessive censorship.
The Copyright Directive is an attempt to reshape copyright for the internet, in particular rebalancing the relationship between copyright holders and online platforms."
"Digital rights groups are campaigning against the Copyright Directive, which the European Parliament will vote on later this month.
The legislation aims to protect rights-holders in the internet age.
But critics say it misunderstands the way people engage with web content and risks excessive censorship.
The Copyright Directive is an attempt to reshape copyright for the internet, in particular rebalancing the relationship between copyright holders and online platforms."
Thursday, June 7, 2018
Copyright Term: When Does a Work Enter the Public Domain?; Lexology, May 24, 2018
Workman Nydegger - J. Dustin Howell, Lexology; Copyright Term: When Does a Work Enter the Public Domain?
"Years ago, there was a radio show that featured a lawyer who would take calls from listeners and answer their legal questions. A man called into the show and said he had obtained some photographs of warplanes from a museum. A cable network had contacted the man about using the photographs as part of a documentary it was making. This man was wise enough to know that the photographs may very well be protected by copyright. He wanted to know how to find out if the photographs were still protected by copyright and who owned them, because without owning the copyrights himself or having a license from the copyright owner, the man could not authorize the cable network to use the photographs. Whether a work (e.g., photograph, literature, music, sculpture, movie, etc.) is protected by copyright or whether it is in the public domain for anyone to use can depend on a variety of factors."
"Years ago, there was a radio show that featured a lawyer who would take calls from listeners and answer their legal questions. A man called into the show and said he had obtained some photographs of warplanes from a museum. A cable network had contacted the man about using the photographs as part of a documentary it was making. This man was wise enough to know that the photographs may very well be protected by copyright. He wanted to know how to find out if the photographs were still protected by copyright and who owned them, because without owning the copyrights himself or having a license from the copyright owner, the man could not authorize the cable network to use the photographs. Whether a work (e.g., photograph, literature, music, sculpture, movie, etc.) is protected by copyright or whether it is in the public domain for anyone to use can depend on a variety of factors."
Wednesday, June 6, 2018
When Scientists Develop Products From Personal Medical Data, Who Gets To Profit?; NPR, May 31, 2018
Richard Harris, NPR; When Scientists Develop Products From Personal Medical Data, Who Gets To Profit?
"If you go to the hospital for medical treatment and scientists there decide to use your medical information to create a commercial product, are you owed anything as part of the bargain?
That's one of the questions that is emerging as researchers and product developers eagerly delve into digital data such as CT scans and electronic medical records, making artificial-intelligence products that are helping doctors to manage information and even to help them diagnose disease.
This issue cropped up in 2016, when Google DeepMind decided to test an app that measures kidney health by gathering 1.6 million records from patients at the Royal Free Hospital in London. The British authorities found this broke patient privacy laws in the United Kingdom. (Update on June 1 at 9:30 a.m. ET: DeepMind says it was able to deploy its app despite the violation.)
But the rules are different in the United States."
"If you go to the hospital for medical treatment and scientists there decide to use your medical information to create a commercial product, are you owed anything as part of the bargain?
That's one of the questions that is emerging as researchers and product developers eagerly delve into digital data such as CT scans and electronic medical records, making artificial-intelligence products that are helping doctors to manage information and even to help them diagnose disease.
This issue cropped up in 2016, when Google DeepMind decided to test an app that measures kidney health by gathering 1.6 million records from patients at the Royal Free Hospital in London. The British authorities found this broke patient privacy laws in the United Kingdom. (Update on June 1 at 9:30 a.m. ET: DeepMind says it was able to deploy its app despite the violation.)
But the rules are different in the United States."
Tuesday, June 5, 2018
Data mining: why the EU’s proposed copyright measures get it wrong; The Conversation, May 24, 2018
Senior Lecturer in Intellectual Property and Internet Law, University of Glasgow,
The Conversation; Data mining: why the EU’s proposed copyright measures get it wrong
"Data that is mined with the help of machine learning techniques has been a rapid area of technological advancement – with good and bad consequences for everyone. And EU copyright law is currently caught in the crossfire.
Cambridge Analytica and Facebook’s recent data scandal, which involved the profiling of users from their online behaviour facilitated by social networks, brought important issues to the surface about web privacy, only after it was reported that millions of people had their data harvested and improperly shared with a political consultancy.
But the same data mining technique also offers great societal benefit in fields such as traffic prediction, natural language processing and the identification of potential cures for diseases.
Many people think that regulating the use of data is a matter of data protection or privacy laws. However, where the raw material subjected to analysis is not “personal data” but material protected under copyright law, such as texts or certain structured databases, another set of legal norms come into play. This has far reaching and little understood consequences."
Judge Denies Author Attempt to Trademark 'Cocky' ; Publishers Weekly, June 4, 2018
Jim Milliot, Publishers Weekly; Judge Denies Author Attempt to Trademark 'Cocky'
"Although Hopkins had obtained her trademark, the law
only allows trademarks in limited cases. The law prevents individual
titles from being trademarked, only series titles, and allows that
common words cannot be trademarked at all, unless they develop an
association in the minds of the public with a particular source...
In
denying Hopkins’ motion for an injunction, Judge Hellerstein found that
the injunction was unlikely to proceed on the merits, noting that
“cocky” is a common word and a weak trademark."
Rapunzel, Rapunzel let down your trademark restrictions; The Boston Globe, June 5, 2018
Maria Cramer, The Boston Globe; Rapunzel, Rapunzel let down your trademark restrictions
"Companies pay the Patent and Trademark Office a small fee to register for a trademark, and generally it is not unusual for trademark applications to go unchallenged, said Jennifer Rothman, a law professor at Loyola Law School in California who teaches trademark law and is not connected to the case.
“The Patent and Trademark Office doesn’t have a lot of time to review these things,” Rothman said. “If no one opposes it, they approve it.”
Some companies take advantage of the less-than-robust screening process to snap up well-known names, then file complaints against businesses that have used the names for their products to leverage payments, Rothman said."
"Companies pay the Patent and Trademark Office a small fee to register for a trademark, and generally it is not unusual for trademark applications to go unchallenged, said Jennifer Rothman, a law professor at Loyola Law School in California who teaches trademark law and is not connected to the case.
“The Patent and Trademark Office doesn’t have a lot of time to review these things,” Rothman said. “If no one opposes it, they approve it.”
Some companies take advantage of the less-than-robust screening process to snap up well-known names, then file complaints against businesses that have used the names for their products to leverage payments, Rothman said."
In Defense Of Fair Use; Intellectual Property Watch, June 4, 2018
Roy Kaufman, Managing Director, Business Development, Copyright Clearance Center (CCC), Intellectual Property Watch; In Defense Of Fair Use
"Copyright law, to be sustainable, calls for a balance. Under copyright law, creators receive exclusive rights to allow or prevent others from making copies of their works for a limited time as an incentive to create. Users receive benefits from the results of the creator’s labor, perhaps through watching, reading or listening to those results. Users may also benefit pursuant to a license to use the works in other ways. Eventually the works fall into the public domain, allowing further reuse by everyone
Recent litigation involving a graffiti artist and a purveyor of sportswear shows how sometimes a flexible mechanism for balancing the copyright entitlements of creators and users makes sense. In this case, clothier H&M used graffiti painted without authority in a public park as backdrop for an ad. The case, as reported in The New York Times, asks “Does a mural painted illegally in a public park in Williamsburg deserve the safeguards of federal copyright law?”"
"Copyright law, to be sustainable, calls for a balance. Under copyright law, creators receive exclusive rights to allow or prevent others from making copies of their works for a limited time as an incentive to create. Users receive benefits from the results of the creator’s labor, perhaps through watching, reading or listening to those results. Users may also benefit pursuant to a license to use the works in other ways. Eventually the works fall into the public domain, allowing further reuse by everyone
Recent litigation involving a graffiti artist and a purveyor of sportswear shows how sometimes a flexible mechanism for balancing the copyright entitlements of creators and users makes sense. In this case, clothier H&M used graffiti painted without authority in a public park as backdrop for an ad. The case, as reported in The New York Times, asks “Does a mural painted illegally in a public park in Williamsburg deserve the safeguards of federal copyright law?”"
Monday, June 4, 2018
Photographers Shutter at Plan to Boost Copyright Fees; Bloomberg, June 4, 2018
Anandashankar Mazumdar, Bloomberg; Photographers Shutter at Plan to Boost Copyright Fees
"A U.S. Copyright Office proposal to nearly double some fees has freelance photographers feeling exposed.
The agency wants to increase fees for a range of services. The fee for registering a single book or song, for example, would rise from $55 to $75 under the proposal. The fee for registering up to 750 images at once—something photographers often do—would jump from $55 to $100. The office will accept comments on the proposal until July 23.
The proposal is one more potential hurdle for photographers, who have grappled with rapid changes in markets and technology since the 1990s and struggle to police their copyrights in the digital age. Critics say the increase will discourage photographers from registering their copyrights, which runs counter to public interest."
"A U.S. Copyright Office proposal to nearly double some fees has freelance photographers feeling exposed.
The agency wants to increase fees for a range of services. The fee for registering a single book or song, for example, would rise from $55 to $75 under the proposal. The fee for registering up to 750 images at once—something photographers often do—would jump from $55 to $100. The office will accept comments on the proposal until July 23.
The proposal is one more potential hurdle for photographers, who have grappled with rapid changes in markets and technology since the 1990s and struggle to police their copyrights in the digital age. Critics say the increase will discourage photographers from registering their copyrights, which runs counter to public interest."
Thursday, May 31, 2018
NAFTA negotiators must protect U.S. intellectual property; Dallas News, May 30, 2018
Tom Giovanetti, Dallas News; NAFTA negotiators must protect U.S. intellectual property
"When the North American Free Trade Agreement came into effect, the U.S. economy was already more dependent on innovation than upon traditional manufacturing. And in the 30 years since, that trend has only continued. Today, the U.S. is a creators' economy; we patent new inventions, copyright new creative works, and trademark strong new brands.
These industries, identified as the intellectual property-intensive industries by the Commerce Department, are responsible for nearly one-third of all U.S. jobs and for more than 38 percent of U.S. gross domestic product. So there's a good chance you or someone close to you works in these industries, which include software, music and book publishing, movies and entertainment, pharmaceuticals, chemicals and enzymes, patented and hybridized plants and seeds, microchip design or aircraft manufacturing.
In any given year, the intellectual property-intensive industries are responsible for around 60 percent of all U.S. exports. In other words, the majority of what the rest of the world wants from the U.S. is our creative output."
"When the North American Free Trade Agreement came into effect, the U.S. economy was already more dependent on innovation than upon traditional manufacturing. And in the 30 years since, that trend has only continued. Today, the U.S. is a creators' economy; we patent new inventions, copyright new creative works, and trademark strong new brands.
These industries, identified as the intellectual property-intensive industries by the Commerce Department, are responsible for nearly one-third of all U.S. jobs and for more than 38 percent of U.S. gross domestic product. So there's a good chance you or someone close to you works in these industries, which include software, music and book publishing, movies and entertainment, pharmaceuticals, chemicals and enzymes, patented and hybridized plants and seeds, microchip design or aircraft manufacturing.
In any given year, the intellectual property-intensive industries are responsible for around 60 percent of all U.S. exports. In other words, the majority of what the rest of the world wants from the U.S. is our creative output."
Most Popular Game on the Planet Accused of Copyright Violation; Bloomberg, May 28, 2018
Yuji Nakamura and Sam Kim, Bloomberg; Most Popular Game on the Planet Accused of Copyright Violation
"The companies behind two of the world’s most popular video games are squaring off in court.
PUBG Corp., an affiliate of South Korean studio Bluehole Inc., is suing the Korean unit of North Carolina-based Epic Games, arguing that its smash hit Fortnite copies many of the characteristics of its own PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds. The suit, alleging copyright infringement, was filed in South Korea.
PUBG introduced its game last year and it became a huge hit as players embraced the Hunger Games-style concept in which 100 players race to kill each other until there’s a sole survivor. But the game’s features have been embraced by rivals, prompting earlier legal action. Fortnite has a similar concept of 100 people competing with each other, but differs by letting players build fortifications similar to Minecraft and using more cartoon-like graphics aimed at younger players."
"The companies behind two of the world’s most popular video games are squaring off in court.
PUBG Corp., an affiliate of South Korean studio Bluehole Inc., is suing the Korean unit of North Carolina-based Epic Games, arguing that its smash hit Fortnite copies many of the characteristics of its own PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds. The suit, alleging copyright infringement, was filed in South Korea.
PUBG introduced its game last year and it became a huge hit as players embraced the Hunger Games-style concept in which 100 players race to kill each other until there’s a sole survivor. But the game’s features have been embraced by rivals, prompting earlier legal action. Fortnite has a similar concept of 100 people competing with each other, but differs by letting players build fortifications similar to Minecraft and using more cartoon-like graphics aimed at younger players."
Tuesday, May 29, 2018
Why thousands of AI researchers are boycotting the new Nature journal ; Guardian, May 29, 2018
Neil Lawrence, Guardian;
Many in our research community see the Nature brand as a poor proxy for
academic quality. We resist the intrusion of for-profit publishing into
our field. As a result, at the time of writing, more than 3,000
researchers, including many leading names in the field from both
industry and academia, have signed a statement refusing to submit, review or edit for this new journal.
We see no role for closed access or author-fee publication in the
future of machine-learning research. We believe the adoption of this new
journal as an outlet of record for the machine-learning community would
be a retrograde step."
Ivanka Trump Wins China Trademarks, Then Her Father Vows to Save ZTE; The New York Times, May 28, 2018
Sui-Lee Wee, The New York Times; Ivanka Trump Wins China Trademarks, Then Her Father Vows to Save ZTE
"China this month awarded Ivanka Trump seven new trademarks across a broad collection of businesses, including books, housewares and cushions.
At around the same time, President Trump vowed to find a way to prevent a major Chinese telecommunications company from going bust, even though the company has a history of violating American limits on doing business with countries like Iran and North Korea.
Coincidence? Well, probably.
Still, the remarkable timing is raising familiar questions about the Trump family’s businesses and its patriarch’s status as commander in chief."
"China this month awarded Ivanka Trump seven new trademarks across a broad collection of businesses, including books, housewares and cushions.
At around the same time, President Trump vowed to find a way to prevent a major Chinese telecommunications company from going bust, even though the company has a history of violating American limits on doing business with countries like Iran and North Korea.
Coincidence? Well, probably.
Still, the remarkable timing is raising familiar questions about the Trump family’s businesses and its patriarch’s status as commander in chief."
Statement on Steps to Protect Domestic Technology and Intellectual Property from China’s Discriminatory and Burdensome Trade Practices; Press Release, The White House, May 29, 2018
Press Release, The White House;
Statement on Steps to Protect Domestic Technology and Intellectual Property from China’s Discriminatory and Burdensome Trade Practices
"On March 22, 2018, the President signed a memorandum announcing that the United States would take multiple steps to protect domestic technology and intellectual property from certain discriminatory and burdensome trade practices by China. These actions were announced following a report of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative regarding China’s practices with respect to technology transfer, intellectual property, and innovation. In accordance with the March 22 memorandum, the President has been updated on the progress of the announced actions as follows:
- To protect our national security, the United States will implement specific investment restrictions and enhanced export controls for Chinese persons and entities related to the acquisition of industrially significant technology. The proposed investment restrictions and enhanced export controls will be announced by June 30, 2018, and they will be implemented shortly thereafter.
- The United States will continue to pursue litigation at the World Trade Organization for violations of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights based on China’s discriminatory practices for licensing intellectual property. The United States filed the case regarding these violations on March 23, 2018.
- Under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, the United States will impose a 25 percent tariff on $50 billion of goods imported from China containing industrially significant technology, including those related to the “Made in China 2025” program. The final list of covered imports will be announced by June 15, 2018, and tariffs will be imposed on those imports shortly thereafter.
In addition, the United States will continue efforts to protect domestic technology and intellectual property, stop noneconomic transfers of industrially significant technology and intellectual property to China, and enhance access to the Chinese market. Likewise, the United States will request that China remove all of its many trade barriers, including non-monetary trade barriers, which make it both difficult and unfair to do business there. The United States will request that tariffs and taxes between the two countries be reciprocal in nature and value. Discussions with China will continue on these topics, and the United States looks forward to resolving long-standing structural issues and expanding our exports by eliminating China’s severe import restrictions."
Controversy Hides Within US Copyright Bill; Intellectual Property Watch, May 29, 2018
Steven Seidenberg, Intellectual Property Watch; Controversy Hides Within US Copyright Bill
"In a time when partisanship runs wild in the USA and the country’s political parties can’t seem to agree on anything, the Music Modernization Act is exceptional. The MMA passed the House of Representatives on 25 April with unanimous support. And for good reason. Almost all the major stakeholders back this legislation, which will bring some badly needed changes to copyright law’s treatment of music streaming. But wrapped in the MMA is a previously separate bill – the CLASSICS Act – that has been attacked by many copyright law experts, is opposed by many librarians and archivists, and runs counter to policy previously endorsed by the US Copyright Office."
"In a time when partisanship runs wild in the USA and the country’s political parties can’t seem to agree on anything, the Music Modernization Act is exceptional. The MMA passed the House of Representatives on 25 April with unanimous support. And for good reason. Almost all the major stakeholders back this legislation, which will bring some badly needed changes to copyright law’s treatment of music streaming. But wrapped in the MMA is a previously separate bill – the CLASSICS Act – that has been attacked by many copyright law experts, is opposed by many librarians and archivists, and runs counter to policy previously endorsed by the US Copyright Office."
The Demise Of Copyright Toleration; Techdirt, May 24, 2018
Robert S. Schwartz, Techdirt; The Demise Of Copyright Toleration
"Although denying fair use, these content owners were acknowledging a larger truth about copyright, the Internet, and even the law in general: It works largely due to toleration. Not every case is clear; not every outcome can be enforced; and not every potential legal outcome can be endured. Instead, “grey area” conduct must be impliedly licensed, or at least tolerated.
Counsel then or now could not have cited a single court holding on whether the private, noncommercial recording of a song is a lawful fair use. Long before the Supreme Court in Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. said that video home recording from broadcasts as a fair use, the music industry could have pursued consumers for home audio recording from vinyl records. But the risk of losing and establishing a bad precedent was too great.
Toleration endured because fair use, and the practicalities of enforcement, had to be endured by content owners. They recognized that their own creative members also relied on fair use in adapting and building on the works of contemporaries as well as earlier generations. They also realized that offending consumers by suing them might not be a good idea – a reason (in addition to the possibility of losing) why the Sony plaintiffs dropped the individual consumer defendants they had originally named."
"Although denying fair use, these content owners were acknowledging a larger truth about copyright, the Internet, and even the law in general: It works largely due to toleration. Not every case is clear; not every outcome can be enforced; and not every potential legal outcome can be endured. Instead, “grey area” conduct must be impliedly licensed, or at least tolerated.
Counsel then or now could not have cited a single court holding on whether the private, noncommercial recording of a song is a lawful fair use. Long before the Supreme Court in Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. said that video home recording from broadcasts as a fair use, the music industry could have pursued consumers for home audio recording from vinyl records. But the risk of losing and establishing a bad precedent was too great.
Toleration endured because fair use, and the practicalities of enforcement, had to be endured by content owners. They recognized that their own creative members also relied on fair use in adapting and building on the works of contemporaries as well as earlier generations. They also realized that offending consumers by suing them might not be a good idea – a reason (in addition to the possibility of losing) why the Sony plaintiffs dropped the individual consumer defendants they had originally named."
Friday, May 25, 2018
‘Big Deal’ Cancellations Gain Momentum; Inside Higher Ed, May 8, 2018
Lindsay McKenzie, Inside Higher Ed; ‘Big Deal’ Cancellations Gain Momentum
"Also last year, SPARC, an advocacy group for open access and open education, launched a resource tracking big-deal cancellations worldwide. Greg Tananbaum, a senior consultant at SPARC, said that there is a “growing momentum” toward cancellations.
According to data from SPARC (which may not be comprehensive, said Tananbaum), in 2016 five U.S. and Canadian institutions announced cancellations with big publishers such as Springer Nature, Wiley, Taylor & Francis and Elsevier. In 2017, seven more North American institutions said they planned to cancel their big deals, including the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Kansas State University, among others.
Motivation for Cancellation
Both Tananbaum and Anderson agree that one factor driving cancellations of big deals is that library budgets are not growing at the same rate as the cost of subscriptions. Given budget restrictions, “there’s just a reality that tough choices have to be made,” said Tananbaum."
"Also last year, SPARC, an advocacy group for open access and open education, launched a resource tracking big-deal cancellations worldwide. Greg Tananbaum, a senior consultant at SPARC, said that there is a “growing momentum” toward cancellations.
According to data from SPARC (which may not be comprehensive, said Tananbaum), in 2016 five U.S. and Canadian institutions announced cancellations with big publishers such as Springer Nature, Wiley, Taylor & Francis and Elsevier. In 2017, seven more North American institutions said they planned to cancel their big deals, including the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Kansas State University, among others.
Motivation for Cancellation
Both Tananbaum and Anderson agree that one factor driving cancellations of big deals is that library budgets are not growing at the same rate as the cost of subscriptions. Given budget restrictions, “there’s just a reality that tough choices have to be made,” said Tananbaum."
Why Every Media Company Fears Richard Liebowitz; Slate, May 24, 2018
Justin Peters, Slate; Why Every Media Company Fears Richard Liebowitz
"Key
to Liebowitz’s strategy is the pursuit of statutory damages. Under the
Copyright Act of 1976, federal plaintiffs can be awarded statutory
damages if they can prove “willful” infringement,
a term that is not explicitly defined in the text of the bill. (“What
is willful infringement? It’s what the courts say it is,” explained
Adwar. Welcome to the wonderfully vague world of copyright law!) If
a plaintiff had registered the work in question with the Copyright
Office before the infringement occurred or up to three months after the
work was initially published, then he or she can sue for statutory
damages, which can be as high as $150,000 per work infringed. That’s
a pretty hefty potential fine for the unauthorized use of a photograph
that, if it had been licensed prior to use, might not have earned the
photographer enough for a crosstown taxi.
“Photographers are basically small businesses. They’re little
men. But you have this powerful tool, which is copyright law,” said Kim,
the freelance photographer. The question that copyright attorneys,
media executives, and federal judges have been asking themselves for 2½
years is this: Is Richard Liebowitz wielding that tool responsibly? “He
offers [his clients] nirvana, basically. He essentially offers them: I
will sue for you, I don’t care how innocuous the infringement, I don’t
care how innocuous the photograph, I will bring that lawsuit for you and
get you money,” said attorney Kenneth Norwick. And the law allows him
to do it. So is Liebowitz gaming the system by filing hundreds of
“strike suits” to compel quick settlements? Or is he an avenging angel
for photographers who have seen their livelihoods fade in the internet
age? “They can call Richard Liebowitz a troll,” said Kim. “Better to be a
troll than a thief.”...
Over the past 2½ years, Liebowitz has attained boogeyman status in the
C-suites of major media organizations around the country. Like the
villain in a very boring horror movie featuring content management
systems and starring bloggers, his unrelenting litigiousness has
inspired great frustration amongst editors and media lawyers fearful
that they will be the next to fall victim to the aggravating time-suck
known as a Richard Liebowitz lawsuit. And he is probably all of the
things his detractors say he is: a troll, an opportunist, a guy on the
make taking advantage of the system. He is also a creature of the media
industry’s own making, and the best way to stop him and his disciples is
for media companies to stop using photographers’ pictures without
paying for them—and to minimize the sorts of editorial mistakes borne
out of ignorance of or indifference to federal copyright law. “People
should realize—and hopefully will continue to realize,” said Liebowitz,
“that photographers need to be respected and get paid for their work.”"
It Took 17 Years: Freelancers Receive $9 Million in Copyright Suit; The New York Times, April 30, 2018
Jaclyn Peiser, The New York Times;It Took 17 Years: Freelancers Receive $9 Million in Copyright Suit
"Seventeen
years after nearly 3,000 freelance journalists filed a class-action
lawsuit claiming copyright infringement by some of the country’s biggest
publishers, the checks are finally in the mail.
The
2,500 writers who made it through the tortuous legal process will start
receiving their pieces of a settlement totaling $9 million this week...
The
Authors Guild filed the suit — along with the American Society of
Journalists and Authors, the National Writers Union and 21 freelance
writers named as class representatives — in 2001 after publishers
licensed articles by freelancers to the electronic database Lexis/Nexis
and other digital indexers without getting the writers’ approval. The
publishers include The New York Times, Dow Jones, and Knight Ridder, as
well as Reed Elsevier, the provider of Lexis/Nexis.
Thursday, May 24, 2018
New privacy rules could spell the end of legalese — or create a lot more fine print; The Washington Post, May 24, 2018
Elizabeth Dwoskin, The Washington Post; New privacy rules could spell the end of legalese — or create a lot more fine print
"“The companies are realizing that it is not enough to get people to just click through,” said Lorrie Cranor, director of the CyLab Usable Privacy and Security Laboratory at Carnegie Mellon University and the U.S. Federal Trade Commission’s former chief technologist. “That they need to communicate so that people are not surprised when they find out what they consented to.”
That has become more apparent in the past two months since revelations that a Trump-connected consultancy, Cambridge Analytica, made off with the Facebook profiles of up to 87 million Americans. Cranor said that consumer outrage over Cambridge was directly related to concerns that companies were engaging in opaque practices behind the scenes, and that consumers had unknowingly allowed it to happen by signing away their rights.
Irrespective of simpler explanations, the impact and success of the GDPR will hinge upon whether companies will try to force users to consent to their tracking or targeting as condition for access to their services, said Alessandro Acquisti, a Carnegie Mellon computer science professor and privacy researcher. "This will tell us a lot regarding whether the recent flurry of privacy policy modifications demonstrates a sincere change in the privacy stance of those companies or is more about paying lip service to the new regulation. The early signs are not auspicious.""
"“The companies are realizing that it is not enough to get people to just click through,” said Lorrie Cranor, director of the CyLab Usable Privacy and Security Laboratory at Carnegie Mellon University and the U.S. Federal Trade Commission’s former chief technologist. “That they need to communicate so that people are not surprised when they find out what they consented to.”
That has become more apparent in the past two months since revelations that a Trump-connected consultancy, Cambridge Analytica, made off with the Facebook profiles of up to 87 million Americans. Cranor said that consumer outrage over Cambridge was directly related to concerns that companies were engaging in opaque practices behind the scenes, and that consumers had unknowingly allowed it to happen by signing away their rights.
Irrespective of simpler explanations, the impact and success of the GDPR will hinge upon whether companies will try to force users to consent to their tracking or targeting as condition for access to their services, said Alessandro Acquisti, a Carnegie Mellon computer science professor and privacy researcher. "This will tell us a lot regarding whether the recent flurry of privacy policy modifications demonstrates a sincere change in the privacy stance of those companies or is more about paying lip service to the new regulation. The early signs are not auspicious.""
Public Knowledge Welcomes Sen. Wyden’s ACCESS to Recordings Act; Public Knowledge, May 23, 2018
Shiva Stella, Public Knowledge; Public Knowledge Welcomes Sen. Wyden’s ACCESS to Recordings Act
"Today, Senator Wyden (D-OR) introduced the ACCESS to Recordings Act, which would extend federal copyright protection to pre-1972 sound recordings, and in doing so, harmonize them with their modern counterparts. Public Knowledge applauds Senator Wyden for acknowledging the injustices posed by the current system and fighting to rationalize our copyright law.
The CLASSICS Act, a flawed bill that would hurt consumers, was recently incorporated into the Music Modernization Act, a larger bill addressing other issues in music licensing. Public Knowledge supports the ACCESS to Recordings Act because it provides full federal protection for pre-1972 sound recordings -- something the CLASSICS Act avoids."
"Today, Senator Wyden (D-OR) introduced the ACCESS to Recordings Act, which would extend federal copyright protection to pre-1972 sound recordings, and in doing so, harmonize them with their modern counterparts. Public Knowledge applauds Senator Wyden for acknowledging the injustices posed by the current system and fighting to rationalize our copyright law.
The CLASSICS Act, a flawed bill that would hurt consumers, was recently incorporated into the Music Modernization Act, a larger bill addressing other issues in music licensing. Public Knowledge supports the ACCESS to Recordings Act because it provides full federal protection for pre-1972 sound recordings -- something the CLASSICS Act avoids."
Wednesday, May 23, 2018
No one’s ready for GDPR; The Verge, May 22, 2018
Sarah Jeong, The Verge; No one’s ready for GDPR
"The General Data Protection Regulation will go into effect on May 25th, and no one is ready — not the companies and not even the regulators...
GDPR is only supposed to apply to the EU and EU residents, but because so many companies do business in Europe, the American technology industry is scrambling to become GDPR compliant. Still, even though GDPR’s big debut is bound to be messy, the regulation marks a sea change in how data is handled across the world. Americans outside of Europe can’t make data subject access requests, and they can’t demand that their data be deleted. But GDPR compliance is going to have spillover effects for them anyway. The breach notification requirement, especially, is more stringent than anything in the US. The hope is that as companies and regulatory bodies settle into the flow of things, the heightened privacy protections of GDPR will become business as usual. In the meantime, it’s just a mad scramble to keep up."
"The General Data Protection Regulation will go into effect on May 25th, and no one is ready — not the companies and not even the regulators...
GDPR is only supposed to apply to the EU and EU residents, but because so many companies do business in Europe, the American technology industry is scrambling to become GDPR compliant. Still, even though GDPR’s big debut is bound to be messy, the regulation marks a sea change in how data is handled across the world. Americans outside of Europe can’t make data subject access requests, and they can’t demand that their data be deleted. But GDPR compliance is going to have spillover effects for them anyway. The breach notification requirement, especially, is more stringent than anything in the US. The hope is that as companies and regulatory bodies settle into the flow of things, the heightened privacy protections of GDPR will become business as usual. In the meantime, it’s just a mad scramble to keep up."
How The Recording Industry Hid Its Latest Attempt To Expand Copyright (And Why You Should Call Your Senator To Stop It); Techdirt, May 21, 2018
Mike Masnick, Techdirt; How The Recording Industry Hid Its Latest Attempt To Expand Copyright (And Why You Should Call Your Senator To Stop It)
"Larry Lessig has a piece over at Wired where he explains how this is really just the latest attempt at copyright extension. Earlier this year, we had noted (happily!) that it appeared that the usual crew of copyright maximalists had appeared to give in, saying they had no intention to push for any sort of copyright term extension this year, meaning that for the first time in decades in the US, some works may actually enter the public domain on January 1st next year. And while the CLASSICS Act isn't a straight-up copyright term extension, it is a form of copyright expansion on old works, done for no other purpose than to give the copyright holders more ways to extract money, without any corresponding public benefit. As Lessig notes, this is explicitly a welfare system for musicians...
Now, I should note that I've seen some recording industry lobbyists mocking Lessig's piece, claiming that how could he be against supporting musicians. This, of course, is the whole setup of this bill. It's designed -- like so many copyright expansions in the past -- to make it hard for people to question, because, really, who doesn't want to support the content creators we like? But that ignores the other side of this equation. Copyright is designed to benefit the public. The whole setup is to give an exclusivity to content creators for a limited time in order to give them the incentive to create.
For EVERY SINGLE WORK that would be impacted by this bill, that incentive worked. It worked decades and decades ago. Those recordings were all created prior to 1972. So why do they now need more incentive for the works that were already created? And why, if we're giving them more incentive, does the public not get anything back in return? That's the hidden part that the lobbyists and think tank shills for the recording industry are hoping you'll ignore. The "expansion" here is at the expense of the public. And it's a big expense. For no benefit at all. The copyright system was an incentive system for creation, in the recognition that it would then help the public get access to content. But the CLASSICS Act flips that over. It takes away from the public and provides no new incentives to anyone."
"Larry Lessig has a piece over at Wired where he explains how this is really just the latest attempt at copyright extension. Earlier this year, we had noted (happily!) that it appeared that the usual crew of copyright maximalists had appeared to give in, saying they had no intention to push for any sort of copyright term extension this year, meaning that for the first time in decades in the US, some works may actually enter the public domain on January 1st next year. And while the CLASSICS Act isn't a straight-up copyright term extension, it is a form of copyright expansion on old works, done for no other purpose than to give the copyright holders more ways to extract money, without any corresponding public benefit. As Lessig notes, this is explicitly a welfare system for musicians...
Now, I should note that I've seen some recording industry lobbyists mocking Lessig's piece, claiming that how could he be against supporting musicians. This, of course, is the whole setup of this bill. It's designed -- like so many copyright expansions in the past -- to make it hard for people to question, because, really, who doesn't want to support the content creators we like? But that ignores the other side of this equation. Copyright is designed to benefit the public. The whole setup is to give an exclusivity to content creators for a limited time in order to give them the incentive to create.
For EVERY SINGLE WORK that would be impacted by this bill, that incentive worked. It worked decades and decades ago. Those recordings were all created prior to 1972. So why do they now need more incentive for the works that were already created? And why, if we're giving them more incentive, does the public not get anything back in return? That's the hidden part that the lobbyists and think tank shills for the recording industry are hoping you'll ignore. The "expansion" here is at the expense of the public. And it's a big expense. For no benefit at all. The copyright system was an incentive system for creation, in the recognition that it would then help the public get access to content. But the CLASSICS Act flips that over. It takes away from the public and provides no new incentives to anyone."
Music Modernization Act Gains Momentum in Senate; Variety, May 15, 2018
Ted Johnson and Paula Parisi, Variety; Music Modernization Act Gains Momentum in Senate
"[Smokey] Robinson spoke forcefully on behalf of the MMA and particularly the CLASSICS Act, sharing how a few years ago, he audited the digital services playing his music and found they owed him $250,000. After confronting them, he was offered $12,000 and told, “If you don’t like it, sue us.” Robinson noted there are few artists with the economic means to take on that sort of battle, concluding “We need your help!’”
The legislation passed the House unanimously last month, and it also includes sweeping changes to the licensing regime for digital music services. A Senate version was recently introduced.
The Senators seemed inclined to provide that help."
"[Smokey] Robinson spoke forcefully on behalf of the MMA and particularly the CLASSICS Act, sharing how a few years ago, he audited the digital services playing his music and found they owed him $250,000. After confronting them, he was offered $12,000 and told, “If you don’t like it, sue us.” Robinson noted there are few artists with the economic means to take on that sort of battle, concluding “We need your help!’”
The legislation passed the House unanimously last month, and it also includes sweeping changes to the licensing regime for digital music services. A Senate version was recently introduced.
The Senators seemed inclined to provide that help."
Monday, May 21, 2018
Patent and trademark office coming to Durango; The Durango Herald, May 18, 2018
Patrick Armijo, The Durango Herald; Patent and trademark office coming to Durango
"Several workshops with officials from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in Alexandria, Virginia, are planned for Tuesday and registration for the workshops has been extended until Monday.
The workshop schedule includes:
9:15-10:30 a.m.: An Overview of Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights and Trade Secrets.
10:45 to noon: Conducting Preliminary Federal Trademark Search Using USPTO Website.
1:30 to 2:30 p.m.: Seven-Step Strategy for Preliminary U.S. Patent Search Using USPTO Databases.
2:45 to 3:15 p.m.: Non-USPTO Solicitations and Invention Promotion Scams: Asking the Right Questions.
3:15-4:15 p.m.: A local panel for resources on patent and trademark issues with Ken Freudenberg, an intellectual property attorney; Ryan Finnigan, co-founder of the Maker Lab at the Powerhouse Science Center; Mark Radtke, assistant regional director for the Rocky Mountain Regional Patent and Trademark Office in Denver; John Wolgamott, president of StoneAge Inc.; and Roger Zalneraitis, executive director of La Plata Economic Development Alliance."
"Several workshops with officials from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in Alexandria, Virginia, are planned for Tuesday and registration for the workshops has been extended until Monday.
The workshop schedule includes:
9:15-10:30 a.m.: An Overview of Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights and Trade Secrets.
10:45 to noon: Conducting Preliminary Federal Trademark Search Using USPTO Website.
1:30 to 2:30 p.m.: Seven-Step Strategy for Preliminary U.S. Patent Search Using USPTO Databases.
2:45 to 3:15 p.m.: Non-USPTO Solicitations and Invention Promotion Scams: Asking the Right Questions.
3:15-4:15 p.m.: A local panel for resources on patent and trademark issues with Ken Freudenberg, an intellectual property attorney; Ryan Finnigan, co-founder of the Maker Lab at the Powerhouse Science Center; Mark Radtke, assistant regional director for the Rocky Mountain Regional Patent and Trademark Office in Denver; John Wolgamott, president of StoneAge Inc.; and Roger Zalneraitis, executive director of La Plata Economic Development Alliance."
‘Westworld’ Season 2: Seven Big Things We Still Don’t Know at Midseason; The New York Times, May 21, 2018
Scott Tobias, The New York Times; ‘Westworld’ Season 2: Seven Big Things We Still Don’t Know at Midseason
[SPOILERS BELOW]
"Delos cares about its intellectual property. The theme parks are merely a means to an end — that much was clear from the first season, even clearer from the second, in which recovering Dolores’s father, Peter Abernathy (Louis Herthum), has been a top priority.”
[SPOILERS BELOW]
"Delos cares about its intellectual property. The theme parks are merely a means to an end — that much was clear from the first season, even clearer from the second, in which recovering Dolores’s father, Peter Abernathy (Louis Herthum), has been a top priority.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)