Silverman Adds The Greatest To The King
“Under the same roof: The Greatest and The King.
“What’s his name? What’s his name? And how much will you pay to use it?
“Fisticuffs fans and social historians alike immediately recognize the first two-part question: It’s a paraphrase of the battle-cry immortalized in Don King’s brainchild, the 1974 “Rumble in the Jungle.” A war-whoop thrown triumphantly at a beaten George Foreman by that Zaire boxing match’s victor: Muhammad Ali.
“The very name of the boxing legend, born and called Cassius Clay until his controversial conversion to Islam in the 1960s, became a cause célèbre. And now the latest chapter of a storied life: That bright-lights Arabic moniker will be celebrated by CKX.”
Greg Levine. The ‘Greatest’ Deal: Muhammad Ali Sells Name, Image. Forbes.com. April 12, 2006.
See also:
David Litterick. Ali Joins Elvis In CKX’s Stable. Telegraph.co.uk. April 13, 2006.
CKX. CKX Partners with Muhammad Ali; Company Acquires 80% Interest in Name, Image, Likeness, Trademarks and Existing Licensing Agreements of the “Greatest of All Time.” (Press Release) April 12, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the law, business, and technology of digital content. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
Netflix & Blockbuster In Patent Battle Royale
” Online DVD rental services that deliver movies by mail are growing quickly, with more than 5 million subscribers nationwide. Now the company that pioneered the business, Netflix, is accusing Blockbuster of trying to copy its patented Internet business model.
“Netflix launched its service seven years ago in response to the founder’s frustration with late fees at video stores. Netflix subscribers can keep DVDs as long as they want. As soon as one is returned, a new movie is sent out from the customer’s online wish list. Netflix says that Blockbuster duplicated key features of that service when it launched its own online offering 19 months ago.”
Scott Horsley. Netflix Challenges Blockbuster Over Online Rentals. National Public Radio. April 10, 2006.
See also:
Eric Chabrow. A Patent Blockbuster. InformationWeek. April 10, 2006.
Gina Keating. Netflix May Face Tough Fight In Blockbuster Patent Suit. WashingtonPost.com. April 5, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the law, business, and technology of digital content. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
Netflix & Blockbuster In Patent Battle Royale
” Online DVD rental services that deliver movies by mail are growing quickly, with more than 5 million subscribers nationwide. Now the company that pioneered the business, Netflix, is accusing Blockbuster of trying to copy its patented Internet business model.
“Netflix launched its service seven years ago in response to the founder’s frustration with late fees at video stores. Netflix subscribers can keep DVDs as long as they want. As soon as one is returned, a new movie is sent out from the customer’s online wish list. Netflix says that Blockbuster duplicated key features of that service when it launched its own online offering 19 months ago.”
Scott Horsley. Netflix Challenges Blockbuster Over Online Rentals. National Public Radio. April 10, 2006.
See also:
Eric Chabrow. A Patent Blockbuster. InformationWeek. April 10, 2006.
Gina Keating. Netflix May Face Tough Fight In Blockbuster Patent Suit. WashingtonPost.com. April 5, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the law, business, and technology of digital content. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
Disney Sells TV Online
“Never underestimate the Walt Disney Co.’s willingness to venture into uncharted technological territory. Disney took one big step in October by becoming the first in its industry to offer TV shows for Apple’s video iPod. Now, it’s journeying even further into the world of offering TV shows over the Net. It promises to be, at the very least, a bumpy ride.
“On April 10, Disney announced it will begin testing the market for letting people download from ABC.com the same shows that Disney provides to cable companies and ABC affiliates. The two-month test will include such hot programs as Lost and Desperate Housewives, as well as its less successful Geena Davis show, Commander in Chief.”
Ronald Grover. Disney’s Internet Adventure. BusinessWeek Online. April 11, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the law, business, and technology of digital content. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
BusinessWeek Profiles YouTube
“All Chad Hurley and Steve Chen wanted to do was share some videos from a dinner party with a half-dozen friends in San Francisco. It was January, 2005, and they couldn’t figure out a good solution. Sending the clips around by e-mail was a bust: The e-mails kept getting rejected because they were so big. Posting the videos online was a headache, too. So last February the two buddies got to work in Hurley’s garage, determined to design something simpler.
“What they came up with is now called YouTube. In 11 months the site has become one of the most popular on the Net. It shows 30 million videos a day and drew 9.1 million people in February, says Web measurement service Nielsen//NetRatings. That makes the upstart one of the biggest providers of videos on the Net, ahead of Yahoo! and Google and just behind Microsoft, according to the Nielsen//NetRatings estimates.”
Heather Green. YouTube: Way Beyond Home Videos. BusinessWeek Online. April 10, 2006.
See also:
Mark Glaser. YouTube CEO Hails ‘Birth of a New Clip Culture.’ April 4, 2006.
Updates:
Dawn C. Chmielewski. Studios Not Sure Whether Web Video Innovator Is Friend or Foe. LATimes.com. April 10, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the law, business, and technology of digital content. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
Morpheus Owner To Fight Big Music In Court
Noting that settlement talks with the Recording Industry Association of America and other entertainment firms had broken down, the company that owns the Morpheus online file-swapping software said late last week that it would fight copyright infringement allegations in court.
StreamCast Networks, the Australian company that owns Morpheus, had been trying to settle litigation with the music industry after the U.S. Supreme Court held nearly one year ago that StreamCast and other file sharing firms could be held liable for copyright infringement.
In reversing a federal appeals court in California, the Supreme Court’s ruling in Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc., et al. v. Grokster, Ltd., et al., determined that the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit mistakenly concluded that Internet-based file sharing services like Grokster and StreamCast’s Morpheus should be immunized from copyright liability for acts of copyright infringement that others commit on their networks. “We hold that one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties,” wrote Justice David Souter.
The judgment in the MGM case called for the Ninth Circuit to reconsider its decision in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling. Copyright lawyer William Patry opined in his blog after the decision was released that the Court “punted” and effectively decided the case on issues not at issue. The original case and controversy dates back to 2003.
StreamCast has decided to fight this case at the same time it has launched a lawsuit against Skype, the distributor of popular free Internet telephony software. StreamCast alleges in this lawsuit that it owns the underlying technology Skype uses in its business.
StreamCast has chosen to litigate its case against Skype under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), a United States federal law which provides for extended penalties for criminal acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization
Jim Welte. StreamCast To Fight Music Biz. MP3.com. April 7, 2006.
See also:
Alex Veiga. Copyright Talks Break Down. San Jose Mercury News. April 9, 2006.
Candace Lombardi. StreamCast Names Skype, Kazaa In Lawsuit. News.com. March 27, 2006.
CopyCense. Grokster Reflection. June 30, 2005.
CopyCense. Supreme Court Rules Against Grokster. June 28, 2005.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the law, business, and technology of digital content. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
“Da Vinci” Code Publisher Cleared of Infringement Charges
“A High Court judge ruled on Friday that Dan Brown did not steal the idea for his stratospherically successful thriller, “The Da Vinci Code,” from an earlier book, and he cleared Mr. Brown’s publisher, Random House, of accusations of copyright infringement.
“In issuing his opinion, Justice Peter Smith said Mr. Brown had indeed relied on the earlier work, “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail,” in writing a section of “The Da Vinci Code.” But he said two of the authors of “Holy Blood,” Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, had failed in their effort to prove that Mr. Brown had stolen their “central theme” because they could not accurately state what that theme was.”
Sarah Lyall. Idea for ‘Da Vinci Code’ Was Not Stolen, Judge Says. The New York Times. April 8, 2006.
See also:
Nigel Reynolds. Brown Wins Battle Over Da Vinci Code. News.telegraph. April 8, 2006.
FT.com. Da Vinci Code Wins High Court Case. April 7 2006.
Guardian Unlimited. Brown Wins Da Vinci Code Case. April 7, 2006.
The Independent. Claim Against Da Vinci Code Rejected. April 7, 2006.
Updates:
Sarah Lyall. Puzzle Embedded in ‘Da Vinci Code’ Ruling. The New York Times. April 27, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the law, business, and technology of digital content. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
COPYCENSE 