subscribe to this page
This book provides a layout and description of the options available to multimedia copyright owners for the protection of their works from unauthorized use. The utility and potential weakness of various antipiracy techniques and applications are discussed, including adult image filtering, encryption, watermarking, fingerprinting, and authentication among others. The book also provides discussion of various issues of interest to copyright owners regarding the parameters and limitations of applying Digital Rights Management techniques within intellectual property law.
In reference to my project, the plaintiff and defendant in the Viacom v. YouTube case represent two sides of an ongoing tug-of-war over legal rights to make use of copyrighted content. These two opposing sides are copyright owners and fair use claimants. The book addresses this topic.--"Although copyright literally means 'right to copy,' the term isnow used to cover a number of exclusive rights granted to the authors for the protection of their work...There are, however, limitations on these rights as established in several sections of the 1976 Copyright Act. One important limitation, the doctrine of 'fair use,' has been the subject of a major discussion oncontent protection" (6)
Furht, Borko, and Darko Kirovski. Multimedia Security Handbook (Internet and Communications). Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2005
This is the actual case in which Viacom filed an amended complaint, seeking punitive damages in addition to the statuory damages originally requested in the March 13, 2007 case.
In reference to my project, this provides an update to the ongoing case of Viacom v. Youtube. The request to amend for additional damages was denied. It was ordered that punitive damages could not be recovered in accordance with the Copyright Act.
Viacom Inernational Inc.v. YouTube, Inc. No. 95-02103. Southern District of New York District Ct. of the US. 7 March 2008.
This book presents a guide to the resource acquisition, legal, and financial necessities of producing an independent film. Every aspect of the planning and execution of the business side of filmmaking is discussed, including hypothetical situations based on the personal experience of the entertainment lawyers who co-authorized the book. The book introduces the roles of producer and lawyer, then outlines the film development process through deal making, financing, hiring, licensing and distribution.
As is pertains to my project, this book provides valuable insight into the warranted concern that filmmakers have had with the 21st century dispute over Internet distribution rights. In the case of Viacom v. Youtube, the exclusive rights per the 1976 Copyright Act for copyright owners to reproduce their works became the basis for allegations against YouTube for a count of direct copyright infringement. The authors of this book advise filmmakers to negotiate with distributors on the basis that they "cannon distribute on the Net until there is adequate 'border protection' to prevent access outside licensed territories" (132).
Erickson, Gunnar, Harris Tulchin, Mark Halloran, and J. Gunnar Erickson. The Independent Film Producer's Survival Guide: A Business and Legal Sourcebook . New York: Schirmer Trade Books, 2005
Intellectual property is an essential element of innovation. In order for innovative businesses to introduce intellectual property into the global market, strategic management and protective policies are necessary. The book looks at the dynamics and challenges of managing intellectual property. The book details effective strategies for balancing intellectual property innovation and marketing in the public domain, with effective acquisition and protection of ownership rights. The book is comprehensive, advancing from the history of these issues from a global perspective to future challenges that face pioneering global business models.
As it pertains to my project, the book describes Google as a visionary company that, despite the legal accusations against the business giant, may have success in reshaping the future of copyright law (135).
Gollin, Michael A. Driving Innovation: Intellectual Property Strategies for a Dynamic World . New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008
The rights to intellectual property and the revenue thereof can make or break an entrepreneurial business. This book covers the gambit of trade secrets that tech-savvy entrepreneurs may need to protect intellectual property in the dynamic arena of copyright law, licensing, patenting, and trademark acquisition. The book makes examples of the infringement issues faced by international business icons such as Microsoft and Amazon.com.
As it pertains to my project, the book also goes over the provisions for statutory versus actual damages in the 1976 Copyright Act (115). These provisions are under review in the Viacom v. YouTube case.
Guide, Gilbert. The Entrepreneur's Guide to Patents, Copyrights, Trademarks, Trade Secrets & Licensing . New York: The Berkley Publishing Group, 2004
Intellectual property is taking on new forms in the digital media market. Consumers are exploring their creative license through the use of multimedia service providers in unprecidented ways. This surge of consumer digital media use is also bringing to a head new conflicts between intellectual property rights Creative Commons, and Digital Rights Management. This book explores this phenomenon and the various ways in which major digital media service providers are being effected by this rapidly changing market environment. Overviews of the business performance, legal goings on, and multimedia services of such industry icons as Google, Inc., Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Sony BMG, Napster and more are discussed.
In reference to my project, the book looks at precident intellectual property cases and gives insights into how the concepts within the 1976 Copyright Act are applicable to the cases. The author also notes that Google has aside $200 million in escrow to deal with inevitable litigation, lists the various number of litigations involving YouTube, and notes that these cases will set important precedents for future review of copyright law as it pertains to Internet videos (253).
Rimmer, Matthew. Digital Copyright and the Consumer Revolution: Hands Off My Ipod. Massachusetts: Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc., 2007
The development of internet communities, the phenomenon of file-sharing, chat room hosting, and surfing are all aspects of cyberspace social behaviors that have coalesced to create a thriving social organism, or ecology. In the book, Huberman makes a scientific observation of this phenomenon as statistically goverened patterns. While discussing the application of such physics concepts as Brownian motion and Zipf's Law, Huberman researches the mechanics of internet social behaviors, and the value of such findings to the future development of internet busines models and application architecture.
In relation to my project, and the accusations from Viacom, YouTube is being accused of actually inducing illegal behavior. Huberman looks at various problematic features of file-sharing networks, and their contribution to the dilemma of creating user-friendly file-sharing functions at the risk of creating illegally replicated material (69).
Huberman, Bernardo A. The Laws of the Web: Patterns in the Ecology of Information . Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2001
This book provides a layout and description of the options available to multimedia copyright owners for the protection of their works from unauthorized use. The utility and potential weakness of various antipiracy techniques and applications are discussed, including adult image filtering, encryption, watermarking, fingerprinting, and authentication among others. The book also provides discussion of various issues of interest to copyright owners regarding the parameters and limitations of applying Digital Rights Management techniques within intellectual property law.
In reference to my project, the plaintiff and defendant in the Viacom v. YouTube case represent two sides of an ongoing tug-of-war over legal rights to make use of copyrighted content. These two opposing sides are copyright owners and fair use claimants. The book addresses this topic.--"Although copyright literally means 'right to copy,' the term isnow used to cover a number of exclusive rights granted to the authors for the protection of their work...There are, however, limitations on these rights as established in several sections of the 1976 Copyright Act. One important limitation, the doctrine of 'fair use,' has been the subject of a major discussion oncontent protection" (6)
Furht, Borko, and Darko Kirovski. Multimedia Security Handbook (Internet and Communications). Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2005
This book goes over the trends in multimedia that are pushing multimedia services into unprecidented technological formats. There is an in-depth analysis of the multimedia security technologies applied to digital data as prevention of copyright abuse or violation. These various copyright protection techniques inlude digital watermarking, steganography, fingerprinting and data hiding among others.
For the purpose of my project, the book discusses how the ease of communication of digital data is making it a globally accessible commodity. This is why positive internet video sharing service and televisions industry partnerships are being fostered. There is a growing demographic of interenet file-sharing service users who can be reached with multimedia entertainment. The future of these internet hosting / television industry busines partnerships is being forged out of the new technologies in digital data sharing.
Also of interest for my project is that the book also addresses the matter at the root of the uneasiness and friction between multimedia industries like the television companies and the internet video-sharing environment in general. That problem is arising from the polarized interests of intellectual rights owners and interntet end-users seeking free access to information.--"...The development of digital technologies permitting transmission of digital data over the internet has raised questions about how these rights apply in the new environment. How can digital intellectual property be made publicly available while guaranteeing ownership of the intellectual rights by the rights-holder and free access to information by the user?" (3).
- Lu,Chun-Shien. Multimedia Security: Steganography and Digital Watermarking Techniques for Protection of Intellectual Property. Hersey: Idea Group Inc., 2005
Bound By Law, authored by Duke IP Law professor James Boyle, Jennifer Jenkins and illustrated by cartoonist turned IP law professor Keith Aoki, is a comic that chronicles, into plain English, the struggle of one documentary filmmaker’s perils into current copyright law. The story begins with a creepy goblin, who seems to be an unfortunate librarian at the Center for the Study of the Public Domain, introducing the audience to two well mannered individuals (could James and Jennifer) who will guide the filmmaker, Akiko, through the confusing world of copyright and filmmaking. Akiko desires to make a documentary capturing all the sights, sounds, social issues and culture of one day in the life of New York. She asks her guides if she will need to clear rights for everything she captures, and that’s where the journey begins. Here she learns of that only works published before 1923 are clearly in the public domain, leaving eighty years of content that may need to be cleared for her film, if she happens to capture it on film. Akiko hesitantly learns of the changes in copyright law, the extensions and increasing amount permission clearances needed for her work, and also a helpful lesson in fair use in how “rights” culture can be changed by “making collective decisions about what’s fair”, and how the intention of fair use mediates between giving incentive to authors to use content to critique on culture. After having explored the world of fair use our hero embarks on the journey through term limits which unfortunately has been subject to some of the most draconian changes, including the most recent copyright extension (CTEA) which protects the works of an author for life plus seventy years after the author’s death and also extended all work currently under copyright for an additional twenty years. The comic beautifully and simple illustrates how this runs counter to the constitutions intentions and how current copyright law is doing harm to the public domain. The guides then bring Akiko to a ledge where the cold, dark, fenced factories and plants of corporate and restrictive control are contrasted with James Boyle’s ecological idea of sustainable development in the balance of copyright and creative works which is illustrated with a lush open landscape of creativity.
Relevance
The comic beautifully illustrated the ins and outs of copyright law and made the plethora of literature, prior to discovering this text, a bit more simple to understand. It balances the restrictions, and purpose of copyright law with the freedom a creator inherently is given. There is a considerable amount of content covering fair use, but the section on the copyright term extension is most applicable to my research. The comic wonderfully shows the frustration regarding the increasing amount of extensions and there affects and on the public domain. The work itself is a testament to the balance of creativity and law, and it’s endeavor to make these issues and rights known in plain English is a wonderful experiment, that I’m better informed after reviewing.
"I am pleased to announce that the RLG Partner Copyright Investigation Summary Report is now available. This report summarizes interviews conducted between August and September 2007 with staff from eight partner institutions. Interviewees shared information about how and why institutions investigate and collect copyright evidence, both for mass digitization projects and for items in special collections. This report is one of the deliverables of the Contribute to the Development of a Registry of Copyright Evidence Project that is part of our Create New Structures and Service Areas work agenda program."
Hatcher examines the workings of the American anime industry, paying the most attention to the history and physical process of fansubbing. Fansubbing is the process by which fans take Japanese anime (taped from broadcast television or DVD/home video), translate it and edit the video to include their own subtitles. Fansubs used to be distributed on VHS either in stores or among fan clubs, but are now almost exclusively found online. Hatcher suggests that the anime industry, though it has unquestionably benefited from fansubbing and other forms of high-level fan involvement, is now "held hostage by the internet and their otaku-consumers." By now professional licensing and localization companies can do much of their own advertising and market research due to the growth and age of the domestic marketplace; yet such companies know that to crack down on the core loyal fans will almost certainly result in a huge backlash from those on whom they rely most. In contrast to common internet "pirates," fansubbing groups commit infringing acts in the open (as publicized on websites or individual named in credits attached to their work) and are confident in the moral high ground of their actions (if a work is not yet licensed in America, it is seen as "perfectly legal" to make it available in fansubbed form, for example-despite international copyright laws); the common conception of "anime fair use" makes many technically illegal uses practically immune to legal retaliation
The almost forced acceptance of the fan use of anime in America, in order to maintain loyalty and relevancy among fanbase, makes anime music videos relatively easy to allow for domestic copyright holders. A lawsuit that attacks a now established tradition within the community would alienate much of a company's fanbase, driving them to other sources-including illegal ones if nothing else is available. Given the companies' general tolerance of (or lack of legal action against) the availability of full episodes or movies online, music videos are a much easier sell as "advertisements" for their products as opposed to replacements or illegal derivative works. And given the industry's heavy stake in the convention scene, it is clear that the community aspect of anime fandom must be maintained and courted in order to stay viable.
Music & Letters © 1986
The Musical Times © 1985
Journal of the Royal Musical Association © 1995 Royal Musical Association
Call#: Van Pelt Library KD1300 .R67 1993
1735-7 emergence of proprietary authorship - copyright as author's basic right rather than special privelege granted by state (45, 56-66)
Call#: Van Pelt Library PR3637.B58 F69 1991
Pope v. Curll 1741 re: letters.
The Constitution of the United States.
"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;"
Call#: Van Pelt Library GN449.6 .H93 1983
quoted in the Ecstasy of Influence
A great Harper's article on the relationship of authorship to creation. Highlights:
"Any text that has infiltrated the common mind to the extent of Gone With the Wind or Lolita or Ulysses inexorably joins the language of culture. A map-turned-to-landscape, it has moved to a place beyond enclosure or control. The authors and their heirs should consider the subsequent parodies, refractions, quotations, and revisions an honor, or at least the price of a rare success."
I've long thought that a reasonable plan.
cited by Gitelman Scripts Grooves.
January 18, 2007
With Arrest of DJ Drama, the Law Takes Aim at Mixtapes
By KELEFA SANNEH
In the world of hip-hop few music executives have more influence than DJ Drama. His "Gangsta Grillz" compilations have helped define this decade's Southern rap explosion. He has been instrumental in the careers of rappers like Young Jeezy and Lil Wayne. He appears on the cover of the March issue of the hip-hop magazine XXL, alongside his friend and business partner T.I., the top-selling rapper of 2006. And later this year DJ Drama is scheduled to make his Atlantic Records debut with "Gangsta Grillz: The Album."
Now DJ Drama is yet another symbol of the music industry's turmoil and confusion.
On Tuesday night he was arrested with Don Cannon, a protégé. The police, working with the Recording Industry Association of America, raided his office, at 147 Walker Street in Atlanta. The association makes no distinction between counterfeit CDs and unlicensed compilations like those that DJ Drama is known for. So the police confiscated 81,000 discs, four vehicles, recording gear, and "other assets that are proceeds of a pattern of illegal activity," said Chief Jeffrey C. Baker, from the Morrow, Ga., police department, which participated in the raid.
DJ Drama (whose real name is Tyree Simmons) and Mr. Cannon were each charged with a felony violation of Georgia's Racketeering Influenced Corrupt Organization law(known as RICO) and held on $100,000 bond.
...
There have been mixtape busts before: in 2005, five employees of Mondo Kim's, in the East Village in New York, were jailed after the store was found to be selling unlicensed mixtapes. But the arrest of a figure as prominent as DJ Drama is unprecedented. Record companies usually portray the fight against piracy as a fight for artists' rights, but this case complicates that argument: most of DJ Drama's mixtapes begin with enthusiastic endorsements from the artists themselves.
It also seems clear that mixtapes can actually bolster an artist's sales. The most recent Lil Wayne solo album, "Tha Carter II" (Cash Money/Universal), sold more than a million copies, though none of its singles climbed any higher than No. 32 on Billboard's Hot 100 chart. That's an impressive feat, and it's hard to imagine how he would have done it without help from a friendly pirate.
This shows somewhat new tactic in the fight against illegal file sharing. Rather than going after the makers of individual programs such as in Grokster and Napster, they went after those providing access to the infringing content. This has a great deal to do with the nature of BitTorrent itself, and speaks to the fact that the potential for non-infringing use is so great, that the MPAA likely would not have thought it worth their time to fight what would have almost inevitably been a lost battle against the technology. The people who run and even use various torrent trackers are likely a bit more worried than they would have been even a month ago, but those using BitTorrent for non-infringing purposes likely need not worry.
The article also goes into a fair amount of detail as to the establishment of a school’s network. One possible solution offered by the article is the establishment of a school sponsored download service. There are downsides to such a solution, but it can have a major impact on illegal downloading, if a legal alternative is easily available at no additional cost (other than what comes out of tuition to pay for the service). Peer-to-peer sharing is a major issue on most college campuses, and with programs such as BitTorrent, it’s only going to continue to grow. If a university can curb illegal file sharing, it lowers the chance of RIAA lawsuits coming into the campus, which would be bad for everyone but the RIAA.
The article also compares the reaction of the MPAA to the flood of movie sharing that has come with BitTorrent to the reaction of the RIAA to the music swapping with Napster and Grokster and the like. The article considers possible outcomes such as the MPAA adopting BitTorrent technology to provide legal movie downloads, such as was seen with Napster 2.0 or the iTunes music store. This thought in particular is somewhat prophetic, as just recently Bram Cohen and BitTorrent Inc. have struck a deal with the MPAA. The history of BitTorrent technology has been one of the great success stories of the information technology age, although depending on whom you ask it could be viewed as one of the worst technologies to hit the Internet. Whatever opinion you have, it seems BitTorrent will be around for a bit longer.
Essentially, this is the most recent and important case regarding peer-to-peer file sharing, and thus any predictions for the future of peer-to-peer technologies will inevitably be based at least in part on this decision. In relation to BitTorrent technologies, the object of predicting the future is somewhat more complicated than with past technologies. It would seem that BitTorrent technology has the potential for a vast amount of non-infringing use, while simultaneously the potential for vast quantities of infringing use. There are important differences between BitTorrent and previous peer-to-peer technologies, including the open nature of BitTorrent, allowing a myriad of different BitTorrent clients to interact with each other. Based solely on the precedent set in Grokster, it seems like it would be impossible to find the makers of BitTorrent applications liable for infringement.
The main finding of the study was that contrary to media claims peer-to-peer traffic had never declined. They claimed that the findings on which the media had based their reports were inaccurate due to the migration within peer-to-peer traffic towards more complicated protocols such as BitTorrent. The ability to trace and measure peer-to-peer traffic within the more basic protocols, such as those used in Napster, is much simpler than with BitTorrent. The ability to change ports, and the lack of a centralized server makes it very difficult to get accurate data using outdated methods. This report is extremely relevant to the topic of BitTorrent within the peer-to-peer world, as it shows the dramatic increase in BitTorrent traffic in the wake of the RIAA’s lawsuits against users. It shows that the lawsuits seem to have little to no effect other than to give the RIAA a negative reputation among the general public.