Archive for January 2007
K. Matthew Dames & Jill Hurst-Wahl in LibraryJournal.com
“Digitization. Everyone’s talking about it, yet few have a firm grasp. Digitization seems to require substantial investment, since large institutions and Google have started massive projects, but there seem to be very few small libraries jumping in.
“However, both large and small institutions should be comfortable with creating, managing, marketing, and preserving digital assets through scanning or otherwise digitizing paper-based (or analog) materials. As we will see, ‘being comfortable’ means being both a generalist and a specialist at the same time.”
A LibraryJournal.com exclusive.
K. Matthew Dames & Jill Hurst-Wahl. Digitizing 101. LibraryJournal.com. Jan. 15, 2007.
CopyCense™: Creativity & Code.™ A venture of Seso Group LLC.
K. Matthew Dames & Jill Hurst-Wahl in LibraryJournal.com
“Digitization. Everyone’s talking about it, yet few have a firm grasp. Digitization seems to require substantial investment, since large institutions and Google have started massive projects, but there seem to be very few small libraries jumping in.
“However, both large and small institutions should be comfortable with creating, managing, marketing, and preserving digital assets through scanning or otherwise digitizing paper-based (or analog) materials. As we will see, ‘being comfortable’ means being both a generalist and a specialist at the same time.”
A LibraryJournal.com exclusive.
K. Matthew Dames & Jill Hurst-Wahl. Digitizing 101. LibraryJournal.com. Jan. 15, 2007.
CopyCense™: Creativity & Code.™ A venture of Seso Group LLC.
Copycense Clippings 1.01
Unlike Google and others, we have refrained from keeping Copycense Clippings in interminable beta. Therefore, this is the first “official” edition of Clippings, funky fresh for the ’07. We’ve labored and tinkered and tried and reshaped … and we’ve decided it’s never going to be exactly the way we want it, so we should just get over it and provide the news as we see fit, making subtle changes along the way.
Of course, we’re keeping little touches like the Quote of the Week (QoTW) and the Article of the Week (AoTW) — even though they’re not in this edition — because they bring levity to a rather dry topic. (And also because we can’t believe how idiotic some people sound when they’re talking about this stuff. Do they really know what they’re saying, or just looking to frame issues?)
For those who are new to Copycense – we have had a number of new subscribers during our hiatus (thank you) — we welcome you. Copycense is about creativity and the code that governs it; that code may be legal code (such as copyright, which we cover extensively); or computer code; or code containing bits and bytes; or code that ultimately makes up content, however we define “content.”
While copyright is the dominant theme, we also report and comment on developments in business, licensing, patent, and online activity that affects, or is affected by, one or more of those topics. K. Matthew Dames is your host this evening, with contributions from a collective of dozens.
Article of the Week
The DJ Drama mixtape controversy is, by far, the Article of the Week, but it is significant enough that we will reserve our analysis for a separate article.
Clippings
- Heise Online. Music Industry Continues to Push for Further Restrictions On Private Copying. Jan. 19, 2007. We already told you that 2007 is the 15th anniversary of the Audio Home Recording Act, and that Big Music was going to move to expand its scope in 2007. We’re taking bets; want to get in on this action? Categories: Fair Use & Other Exceptions; International; Law, Legislation & Regulation; Music.
- Michael Geist. The Copycat Copyright Campaign. Jan. 18, 2007. One of the world’s leading thinkers on copyright discusses the role of citizen and professional uproar on copyright legislation. Categories: Law; Legislation & Regulation.
- Noam Cohen. Bloggers Take on Talk Radio Hosts. The New York Times. Jan. 15, 2007. The story about radio hosts making insulting, derogatory, or “insensitive” remarks is secondary in our minds to 1&1‘s possibly hair trigger, preemptive removal of content in response to a possible or threatened DMCA takedown notice from copyright owner ABC. This begs the question: are ISPs really knowledgeable about how Section 512 operates, or do they merely cave in and reflexively remove content whenever they get a notice about copyrighted material from a person who ends his or her name in “Esq.”? We suspect it’s the latter. Categories: Broadcasting & Journalism; DMCA; Web & Online.
- BBHub. US Patent And Copyright Laws Guide Avilable For BlackBerry. Jan. 17, 2007. OK, you must admit; this is so hot. Categories: Law, Legislation & Regulation; Tech & Devices.
- Marketwatch. Music Industry Declares War on Internet Providers. Jan. 17, 2007. One would think that American ISPs could find some relief in the safe harbor provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. This story suggests Big Music thinks Section 512 is too lax, and will seek to have the scope of that provision narrowed in this new congressional session. Categories: DMCA; International; Music; Law, Legislation & Regulation.
- Andrew Salomon. Will ‘Urinetown’ Case Hamper Artistic Process? Backstage.com. Jan. 17, 2007. When people collaborate on creative works in a hyperactively litigious copyright environment, flare ups like this one are bound to increase. Categories: Bundle of Rights; Ownership.
- Randall Stross. Want an iPhone? Beware the iHandcuffs. The New York Times. Jan. 14, 2007. When the Times resorts to dubbing digital rights management “crippleware,” it is a good indication that the controversy over restricted access to purchased intellectual property is much more prevalent than it used to be. Categories: DRM & Copy Protection; Tech & Devices.
- Ars Technica. Why DRM’s Best Friend Might Just Be Apple Inc. Jan. 11, 2007. Ars Technica advances Billboard‘s story about labels’ possible elimination of DRM by noting the Apple’s refusal to license its Fairplay copy protection technology may ensure that content owners will continue to develop DRM technology. Categories: DRM & Copy Protection; Tech & Devices.
- Info/Law. Back to the Future of Copyright Treatises? Jan. 11, 2007. An interesting post by a University of Minnesota law professor about William Patry’s new copyright treatise. (The 5,000 page print publication is accompanied by a blog as well.) Somewhat to my dismay, there have been few challengers to Nimmer on Copyright. We hope this new addition to the copyright literature changes that. And we note for the record that the razor sharp Patry now is senior copyright counsel for Google. Categories: Research.
- Madisonian.net. Isn’t That (Patent) Special? Jan. 10, 2007. Pitt law professor Mike Madison discusses the Supreme Court’s decision in MedImmune v. Genentech case, which he suggests will change the patent licensing game. Categories: Cases & Litigation; Patent; Science & Medical.
Copycense™: Creativity & Code.™ A venture of Seso Group LLC.
Technorati Tags: CopyCense, CopyCense Clippings, copyright, DRM, K. Matthew Dames, licensing
Pogue As Comedian
David Pogue, technology columnist for the Times, turns composer and torches the RIAA while doing so.
You’ve just been sued by the R.I.A.A.!
You’ve just been sued by the R.I.A.A.!
Their attorneys say, you committed a crime,
And there’d better not be a next time!
Pogue Posts. Ode to the R.I.A.A. Jan. 18, 2007.
CopyCense™: Creativity & Code.™ A venture of Seso Group LLC.
A Reading Road Trip Around Copyright: An Annotated Tour of Copyright Resources
As copyright has become a part of the nation’s mainstream discourse, more publications are devoting time and space to the topic. This has lead to an interesting evolution in publication and viewpoint. Where once copyright was discussed only in expensive, exclusive, and (mostly) print publications and forums, today copyright commentary is readily available in many daily newspapers and for free on several Web sites. Further, where the tone in the exclusive publications discussed copyright mostly in terms of identifying and protecting copyrights held by large corporate institutions, more recent discussions about copyright tend to emphasize either copyright’s potential as a barrier to personal creativity, or the lack of copyright as a potential threat to the national economy.
In reality, copyright really is at neither end of that spectrum. Instead, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. What I’ve decided to do this month is to introduce Online readers to some of the best resources that effectively and accurately represent that middle ground, where copyright is a delicate balance between consumer and creator.
These materials, together and individually, clearly and fairly explain to information professionals what copyright law is, how it works, and what role copyright should play in an environment that is hurtling toward wholesale adoption of content sharing, “clip culture,” and resources that are born digital.
An Online exclusive.
K. Matthew Dames. A Reading Road Trip Around Copyright: An Annotated Tour of Copyright Resources. Online. January/February 2007.
CopyCense™: Creativity & Code.™ A venture of Seso Group LLC.
Plagiarism Is The New “Piracy”
Ohio University is the oldest public university in the state of Ohio, an institution whose enrollment hovers around 20,000 students. For the past year, Ohio University has been besieged by a crippling plagiarism scandal. Based on an alumnus’ allegations that more than 30 students in the school’s mechanical engineering department have plagiarized substantial or core portions of their graduate theses, the Athens, Ohio institution has ordered those students to address the allegations or risk having their degrees revoked. Some of the theses are 20 years old.
This story, which The Wall Street Journal placed on its front page in mid-August, was the latest in a series of plagiarism stories that seem to be destined for headline news. In May, the board of directors at defense contractor Raytheon Co. decided it would withhold a salary raise and reduce incentive stock-compensation to chief executive officer William Swanson after it was revealed that a booklet he authored (entitled “Swanson’s Unwritten Rules of Management”) contained almost verbatim passages from a 1944 book by W.J. King entitled “The Unwritten Rules of Engineering.”
A few weeks earlier, publisher Little, Brown took the extraordinary step of removing the novel How Opal Mehta Got Kissed, Got Wild, and Got a Life from retail shelves after the Harvard Crimson published a story accusing author Kaavya Viswanathan, a Harvard undergraduate student, of pilfering significant portions of two teen novels written by Megan McCafferty.
Based on these developments, plagiarism has become the new piracy. Like “piracy” was a few years ago, plagiarism has become the hot, new “crime du jour,” an act that suggests immorality and often scandal at once. What’s more, plagiarism allegations feed into our society’s “Candid Camera” mentality, our seemingly insatiable need to uncover wrongdoing. This month’s column compares plagiarism and copyright, and the role of information professionals in raising the collective level of citation savvy.
An Information Today exclusive.
K. Matthew Dames. Plagiarism Is The New “Piracy.” Information Today. November 2006.
CopyCense™: Creativity & Code.™ A venture of Seso Group LLC.
Sampling, Registration, and a Broken Copyright System
Remember this name: Armen Boladian. According to Columbia law professor Tim Wu, Boladian is the sole owner of Bridgeport Music, Inc., a one-man company that just happens to control the copyrights to most of George Clinton’s song catalog. Clinton is the mastermind musician and producer behind the monstrous Parliament-Funkadelic bands that ruled soul music during the seventies and eighties. Along with both bands, Clinton is a 1997 inductee into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, and his works remain popular today because they are sampled widely by contemporary hip hop artists.
Boladian also is the plaintiff in the stunningly stupid and ill-conceived 2004 case Bridgeport Music v. Dimension Films. The Bridgeport decision effectively has illegalized musical sampling within the Sixth Circuit (which includes the states of Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee), a holding that runs counter to longstanding doctrine in other judicial circuits about fair and “de minimis” use of protected works.
Following the Bridgeport precedent, a federal jury earlier this year found that producer Sean “Diddy” Combs illegally used an Ohio Players sample on a track of Notorious B.I.G.’s epic 1994 album Ready to Die. The jury awarded Bridgeport a $4 million judgment, and the judge in that case ordered the album off the shelves. The injunction means a work that Rolling Stone magazine considers one of the 500 greatest albums of all time is no longer available.
And last month, Bridgeport sued rapper Jay-Z, alleging he illegally used a sample of a song in the Bridgeport catalog in the 2003 single “Justify My Thug.” Wu’s November article in Slate characterizes Boladian as a “copyright troll.”
On the surface, this month’s column is about music sampling, but the fundamental issues in the Bridgeport cases – including questions of ownership, lack of identifying information about protected work, and the narrowing of fair use – affect all types of information and creative information.
An Information Today exclusive.
K. Matthew Dames. Sampling, Registration, and a Broken Copyright System. Information Today. January 2007.
CopyCense™: Creativity & Code.™ A venture of Seso Group LLC.
COPYCENSE 