Archive for January 2006
Software Cache Case May Affect Google Digitization Ligitation
This is an action for copyright infringement brought by plaintiff Blake Field against Google Inc. Field contends that by allowing Internet users to access copies of 51 of his copyrighted works stored by Google in an online repository, Google violated Field’s exclusive rights to reproduce copies and distribute copies of those works. On December 19, 2005, the Court heard argument on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment.
Based upon the papers submitted by the parties and the arguments of counsel, the Court finds that Google is entitled to judgment as a matter of law based on the undisputed facts. For the reasons set forth below, the Court will grant Google’s motion for summary judgment: (1) that it has not directly infringed the copyrighted works at issue; (2) that Google held an implied license to reproduce and distribute copies of the copyrighted works at issue; (3) that Field is estopped from asserting a copyright infringement claim against Google with respect to the works at issue in this action; and (4) that Google’s use of the works is a fair use under 17 U.S.C. § 107.
The Court will further grant a partial summary judgment that Field’s claim for damages is precluded by operation of the “system cache” safe harbor of Section 512(b) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”). Finally, the Court will deny Field’s cross-motion for summary judgment seeking a finding of infringement and seeking to dismiss the Google defenses set forth above.
U.S. District Court, District of Nevada. Blake A. Field v. Google, Inc. (.pdf, 201 KB) Jan. 12, 2006.
Update:
The Patry Copyright Blog. Google Caches One. Jan. 26, 2006.
Attribution: CopyCense first learned of this decision through a posting on the EFF Deep Links Web site.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the intersection of business, law and technology. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
Kojo Nnamdi Show Debates Software Patents
“There’s a reason why some people are obsessed with their Blackberrys They speed up the pace of business and ensure constant access to your e-mail. But one day, your Blackberry may no longer work. The firm behind the product is in a legal battle with an Arlington (Va.) company that holds the patent on its technology. And [last week] the Supreme Court refused to get involved.
“It’s a dramatic example of a trend that some say is hurting software innovation. Patent challenges are increasingly common, and they don’t just affect large software companies. They may also make life more difficult for the tech department in your company. But supporters of patents say they’re still the best protection for inventors and their work.”
The Kojo Nnamdi Show. Tech Tuesday: Software Patents and the Law. (podcast) WAMU 88.5 FM (Washington, DC). Jan. 24, 2006.
See also:
Groklaw. Math You Can’t Use, Ch. 6 by Ben Klemens. Jan. 14, 2006.
Ben Klemens. Math You Can’t Use: Patents, Copyrights, and Software. 2005, Brookings Institution Press.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the intersection of business, law and technology. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
Broadcast Flag Vendor Keeps Its Technology Secret
“If you’ve been reading here lately, you know that I’m no fan of the Sensenbrenner/Conyers analog hole bill. The bill would require almost all analog video devices to implement two technologies called CGMS-A and VEIL. CGMS-A is reasonably well known, but the VEIL content protection technology is relatively new. I wanted to learn more about it.
“So I emailed the company that sells VEIL and asked for a copy of the specification. I figured I would be able to get it. After all, the bill would make compliance with the VEIL spec mandatory — the spec would in effect be part of the law. Surely, I thought, they’re not proposing passing a secret law. Surely they’re not going to say that the citizenry isn’t allowed to know what’s in the law that Congress is considering. We’re talking about television here, not national security.
“After some discussion, the company helpfully explained that I could get the spec, if I first signed their license agreement.”
Freedom to Tinker. Analog Hole Bill Would Impose a Secret Law. Jan. 23, 2005.
See also:
VEIL Interactive Technologies. VRAM Adopter Agreement. (.pdf, 112 KB) No date.
VEIL Interactive Technologies. About VEIL – Technology. No date.
Freedom to Tinker. CGMS-A + VEIL = SDMI? Jan. 17, 2006.
BNA. Sensenbrenner, Conyers Introduce Bill To Secure Analog Content From Piracy. Dec. 23, 2005.
Public Knowledge. Draft Bill: Digital Transition Security Act of 2005. (.pdf, 112 KB) Dec. 16, 2005.
Public Knowledge. PK’s Testimony on the Content Protection in the Digital Age: The Broadcast Flag, High-Definition Radio, and the Analog Hole. Nov. 3, 2005.
HBO. HBO Copyright Protection Background. No date. (“Commencing in June, HBO will include a technology in its program services that provides copyright protection information to consumer electronic equipment connected to analog outputs of cable and satellite set-top boxes. The technology (CGMS-A — Content Generation Management System for Analog) enables compliant digital recording devices to abide by federal digital encoding rules.”)
Updates:
Nick Parker. Analog Hole: Today the USA, Tomorrow the World. Slyck. Jan. 27, 2006.
Declan McCullagh. Senate May Hoist Broadcast Flag Again. News.com. Jan. 24, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the intersection of business, law and technology. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
Disney Buys Pixar
“The one-time enfant terrible of the technology world has calmed down considerably en route to becoming a 50-year-old billionaire. But what hasn’t changed is [Steve Jobs’] passion for doing, and saying, just about anything to help create the kinds of products that consumers love. In the nine years since Jobs returned to Apple, his unique modus operandi has sparked broad changes in the world of music, movies, and technology.
“Now, Jobs is stepping into the Magic Kingdom. On Jan. 24, Walt Disney agreed to pay $7.4 billion in stock to acquire Pixar Animation Studios, where Jobs is chairman, CEO, and 50.6% owner. As part of the deal, Jobs will become the largest shareholder at Disney and take a seat on the entertainment giant’s board. His top creative executive at Pixar, John A. Lasseter, will oversee the movies at both Pixar’s and Disney’s animation studios. Pixar’s president, Edwin Catmull, will run the business side for the two studios.
“The alliance between Jobs and Disney is full of promise.”
Peter Burrows and Ronald Grover. Steve Jobs’s Magic Kingdom. BusinessWeek Online. Jan. 26, 2006.
See also:
Sheigh Crabtree. Pixar, Disney Draw New Animation Vision. The Hollywood Reporter. Jan. 26, 2006.
David B. Wilkerson. Analysts Cheer Disney’s Pixar Buy. MarketWatch. Jan. 25, 2006.
John Borland and Ina Fried. Jobs’ New Disney Role Raises Conflict Concerns. News.com. Jan. 25, 2006.
Philip Michaels. Don’t Fear the Mouse. Macworld. Jan. 25, 2006.
Charles Cooper. How Long Before Jobs Is Disney’s New Boss? News.com. Jan. 25, 2006.
Ronald Grover. Disney-Pixar: It’s a Wrap. BusinessWeek Online. Jan. 24, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the intersection of business, law and technology. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
King of All Media Doesn’t Podcast
“Satellite radio is a pretty good technology that’s attracting a respectable audience primarily through excellent programming. But let’s be clear — satellite doesn’t hold a candle to podcasting, and not even Howard Stern can change that.
“Sirius signed Stern for $500 million, a deal that’s helped it attract nearly 3.5 million subscribers. It’s hard to argue with a half billion incentives. But — aside from cash — it’s hard to see what satellite could do for Stern that podcasting couldn’t do better.”
Eliot Van Buskirk. Real Stern Shocker: No Podcast. Wired News. Jan. 23, 2006.
Update:
Dawn C. Chmielewski. Sirius Shock: Pirates Hit Howard Stern Show. LATimes.com. Feb. 2, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the intersection of business, law and technology. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
Despite Lawsuits, File Sharing Is Steady
“Global court action against music file-sharers has not reduced illegal downloading, an industry report says. The level of file-sharing has remained the same for two years despite 20,000 legal cases in 17 countries.
“The International Federation of the Phonographic Industries (IFPI) said it was “containing” the problem and more people were connecting to broadband.”
BBC News. File-Sharing ‘Not Cut By Courts.’ Jan. 20, 2006.
See also:
National Consumer Council. National Consumer Council Submission to The All Party Internet Group Inquiry Into Digital Rights Management. (.pdf, 107 KB) Jan. 6, 2006. (“The National Consumer Council (NCC) recognises the value of intellectual property rights (IPRs) as a reward to innovators and creators, but is concerned about the costs placed on consumers of enforcing these rights, and the use of the enforcement of IPRs to curtail legitimate consumer freedoms. The way Digital Rights Management (DRM) technology is being deployed is causing a number of serious problems for consumers.”)
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the intersection of business, law and technology. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
Broadcast Flag Still Hanging Around
“A controversial form of copy protection for digital TV broadcasts inched closer to becoming law on Tuesday after receiving an enthusiastic endorsement from a key U.S. senator.
“Sen. Ted Stevens, an Alaska Republican, said at a hearing that the so-called broadcast flag was necessary to curb Internet piracy of TV shows. Future TV tuners would be required to detect the flag and prevent recordings from being redistributed freely.
The Federal Communications Commission approved the broadcast flag in November 2003, ordering a halt to the manufacture of non-compliant TV tuners. After a federal appeals court said the FCC did not have the authority to order a ban, the entertainment industry turned to Congress for explicit authorization.”
Declan McCullagh. Senate May Hoist Broadcast Flag Again. News.com. Jan. 24, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the intersection of business, law and technology. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
COPYCENSE 