Copyright Office Releases Orphan Works Report
This Report addresses the issue of “orphan works,” a term used to describe the situation where the owner of a copyrighted work cannot be identified and located by someone who wishes to make use of the work in a manner that requires permission of the copyright owner. Even where the user has made a reasonably diligent effort to find the owner, if the owner is not found, the user faces uncertainty – she cannot determine whether or under what conditions the owner would permit use. … Concerns have been raised that in such a situation, a productive and beneficial use of the work is forestalled – not because the copyright owner has asserted his exclusive rights in the work, or because the user and owner cannot agree on the terms of a license – but merely because the user cannot locate the owner. Many users of copyrighted works have indicated that the risk of liability for copyright infringement, however remote, is enough to prompt them not to make use of the work. Such an outcome is not in the public interest, particularly where the copyright owner is not locatable because he no longer exists or otherwise does not care to restrain the use of his work.
The Copyright Office has long shared these concerns, and … was pleased that on January 5, 2005 Senators Orrin Hatch and Patrick Leahy asked the Register of Copyrights to study the orphan works issue in detail, and to provide a report with her recommendations. Also in January 2005, Representatives Lamar Smith and Howard Berman expressed interest in the issue and supported the undertaking of this study.
Our conclusions are:
- The orphan works problem is real.
- The orphan works problem is elusive to quantify and describe comprehensively.
- Some orphan works situations may be addressed by existing copyright law, but many are not.
- Legislation is necessary to provide a meaningful solution to the orphan works problem as we know it today.
We recommend that the orphan works issue be addressed by an amendment to the Copyright Act’s remedies section. The specific language we recommend is provided at the end of this Report.
U.S. Copyright Office. Report on Orphan Works. January 2006.
Updates:
The Patry Copyright Blog. Copyright Office Orphan Works Report. Feb. 6, 2006.
Public Knowledge. The Copyright Office’s way to Solve Orphan Works. Feb. 1, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the intersection of business, law and technology. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
Patent Office Eliminates Patents in Blackberry Case
“A preliminary ruling by the United States patent office on Wednesday further undermined legal claims by a company that has sought to shut the BlackBerry wireless e-mail device in the United States.
“Research in Motion, the Canadian maker of the BlackBerry, said the decision meant that the patent office had twice rejected all five patents controlled by NTP that are related to BlackBerry litigation. NTP is an intellectual property company based in Arlington, Va.”
Ian Austen. Ruling Aids Manufacturer of BlackBerry. The New York Times. Feb. 2, 2006.
See also:
Reuters. U.S. to Judge: Hold Off on BlackBerry Shutdown. News.com. Feb. 1, 2006.
(Editor’s Note: The Times allows free access to their stories on the Web for seven days before sending the stories to the paper’s fee-based Archive.)
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the intersection of business, law and technology. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
Americans to Big Music: Sell a Better Product
Music executives love to blame illegal downloading for their industry’s woes. But, based on the results of a new nationwide poll, they might want to look in the mirror.
Eighty percent of the respondents consider it stealing to download music for free without the copyright holder’s permission, and 92 percent say they’ve never done it, according to the poll conducted for The Associated Press and Rolling Stone magazine.
Meanwhile, three-quarters of music fans say compact discs are too expensive, and 58 percent say music in general is getting worse.
Associated Press. Pirates: It Takes One to Know One. Wired News. Feb. 2, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the intersection of business, law and technology. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
Big Film Co-Opts File Sharing
“An ambitious experiment with selling big-studio movies over a file-swapping network in Germany may portend new kinds of online movie sales in the United States–and give Microsoft new allies in its battle with Apple Computer.
“Warner Bros. Home Entertainment said Monday that it would launch a peer-to-peer video download service in Germany beginning in March, using Bertelsmann-created file-swapping technology to sell movies online at the same time as they’re released on DVD.”
John Borland. Legal DVD Downloads To Hit U.S. Shores? News.com. Jan. 31, 2006.
See also:
BBC News. Warner Bros to Sell Movies on Net. Jan. 31, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the intersection of business, law and technology. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
Comical Copyright
“[Next] month, … the tireless trio of Keith Aoki, James Boyle and Jennifer Jenkins [will] unleash what they believe is the first-ever comic book to explicate a vexing area of law for filmmakers.
“‘Bound by Law?’ is drawn by Aoki and co-written with Duke Law School professors Boyle and Jenkins. Jenkins is the director of Duke Law’s Center for the Study of the Public Domain, and Boyle is a faculty co-director.
“The 66-page book is aimed at helping documentary filmmakers navigate the treacherous waters of copyright law, especially its fair-use doctrine, under which excerpts of copyrighted works may be used without permission in limited circumstances.”
Paul Bonner. Comic Book About Copyright? The Herald-Sun. Jan. 30, 2006.
Update (March 21, 2006): Free digital versions of Bound By Law? are available from the Center for the Study of the Public Domain at Duke Law School.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the intersection of business, law and technology. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
DRM Quickly Becoming a Household Word
“Big media players are accustomed to watching the ratings for the most popular music, video and book content, but perhaps they should pay more attention to how consumers feel about three letters at the bottom of most charts — DRM, which stands for digital rights management.
“Media players are risking a consumer backlash by deploying overzealous systems with such limitations, especially in the wake of Sony BMG’s decision last year to sell CDs with copy-protection software using “rootkits” — computer software frequently used by hackers to cloak the presence of viruses and spyware.
“The Sony incident, however, raises a host of questions. First and foremost is whether consumers are being duped when they buy content, only to find there are restrictions on transferring music to multiple devices or, even worse, that the DRM software exposes their computer to security risks. Other questions include: Is DRM worth the effort? How can you balance the rights of consumers with the rights of media companies? And what’s the future of DRM?”
Knowledge@Wharton. Digital Rights Management (DRM): Media Companies’ Next Flop? No date.
Editor’s note: Version 1.1 of CopyCense’s bibliography on the Sony rootkit scandal is now available.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the intersection of business, law and technology. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
DRM & Skiing
“DRM – the imposition of restrictions on usage of content by technical means – is far more than [like checking your lift ticket when you get on the ski lift]. It’s like checking the lift ticket, yes, but also the guy checks you are only wearing gear hired from the resort shop, skis with you down the slope and trips you if you try any maneuvers that weren’t taught to you by the resort ski instructor; then as you go down the slope he pushes you away from the moguls because those are a premium feature and finally you get to run the gauntlet of armed security guards at the bottom of the slope checking for people who haven’t paid.
“The problem with technology-enforced restrictions isn’t that they allow legitimate enforcement of rights; it’s the collateral damage they cause in the process.”
SunMink. DRM and the Death of a Culture. Jan. 28, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the intersection of business, law and technology. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
COPYCENSE 