“Happy HalloWAN.”



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 922 posts ]  Go to page 1 ... 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 ... 42  ( Previous  |  Next )
Author Message
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 3:14 pm 
User avatar
I HATE BRICKWALLED MUSIC AND CORPORATIONS!

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Posts: 22775
Location: The Pasture
This has nothing to do with music, but is an interesting precedent.

Sans wrote:
--EU Court Limits How Programming Languages and Program Functionality Can be Copyrighted
(May 2, 2012)
The European Court of Justice has ruled that computer program
functionality and programming languages cannot be copyrighted. The issue
was raised in a lawsuit brought by SAS Institute against World
Programming Limited (WPL). SAS alleged that WPL violated its licensing
agreement by developing clone software capable of running SAS scripts.
The court said that while computer code can be copyrighted, its
functional characteristics cannot, and that "to accept that the
functionality of a computer program can be protected by copyright would
amount to making it possible to monopolize ideas, to the detriment of
technological progress and industrial development."

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news ... -ideas.ars

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/ ... onomyId=17

_________________
"Where soulless singers sang over beats built by machines" - Ani DiFranco


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 3:15 pm 
User avatar
I HATE BRICKWALLED MUSIC AND CORPORATIONS!

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Posts: 22775
Location: The Pasture
Sans wrote:
--Congressman Langevin Calls CISPA "A Good-Faith Effort"
(May 2, 2012)
Speaking at a cybersecurity symposium at the University of Rhode Island,
US Congressman Jim Langevin (D-RI) called the Cyber Intelligence Sharing
and Protection Act (CISPA) "a good-faith effort to come together in a
first step towards better cybersecurity for our nation." CISPA has been
decried by privacy groups and the White House has threatened to veto the
bill. Langevin is a strong proponent of cybersecurity training and has
supported legislation that called on the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) to develop a cybersecurity workforce training program and to
support "educational paths to cybersecurity professions."

http://www.fiercegovernmentit.com/story ... 2012-05-02
Langevin's prepared remarks:
http://langevin.house.gov/resources/Lan ... r_2012.pdf

_________________
"Where soulless singers sang over beats built by machines" - Ani DiFranco


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 3:15 pm 
User avatar
SQUIRREL!

Joined: 21 Oct 2004
Posts: 54564
Location: Carmel
alantig wrote:
While not exactly a copyright infringement statement, I read an article about Vince Gill today that shows at least some artists have realized - even if they aren't happy about it - what the record labels can't seem to accept.

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/ae/ ... ry-634270/

Quote:
2012 finds Mr. Gill, who turned 55 April 12, in transition. His MCA contract lapsed last year and he's realistic about his place in the scheme of things. "I still want to have hit records," he admits. "You never get that out of your system. But in some sense," he says with amusement, "I have been shown the door." He has his issues with today's country, where fashion and gimmicky songs often trump the truth he reveres. "For me, it's lost its traditional bent pretty severely," he says. "I would love to hear someone write a song like (the 1981 George Jones hit) 'He Stopped Loving Her Today' rather than 'You're hot. I'm hot. We're in a truck.' It's just mind-numbing to me."

That isn't Music City's only new normal. "Income streams are dwindling. Record sales aren't what they used to be. The devaluation of music and what it's now deemed to be worth is laughable to me. My single costs 99 cents. That's what a (single) cost in 1960. On my phone, I can get an app for 99 cents that makes fart noises -- the same price as the thing I create and speak to the world with. Some would say the fart app is more important. It's an awkward time. Creative brains are being sorely mistreated."


I hadn't thought about it in those terms - more in terms of no physical product, no shipping, the cost should be lower. And he's way off base with the 1960 line - singles were 59 cents in the 1970s. But I can totally understand why an artist feels some level of frustration that something like "Imagine" carries the same monetary value as a fart app.

Alan


I think I'd value a fart app higher than a Vince Gill single as well. :)

_________________
BECAUSE LIFE IS A TREASURE.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 3:16 pm 
User avatar
I HATE BRICKWALLED MUSIC AND CORPORATIONS!

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Posts: 22775
Location: The Pasture
Sans wrote:
--Mozilla Speaks Out Against CISPA
(April 30 & May 1 & 2, 2012)
Mozilla is the first major US company to voice opposition to CISPA, the
bill that recently passed in the US House of Representatives. In a
statement sent to Forbes journalist Andy Greenberg, Mozilla wrote that
"CISPA has a broad and alarming reach that goes far beyond Internet
security." Other technology companies, including Facebook, Symantec,
Verizon, and Microsoft, have voiced their support for CISPA. Microsoft
did say that any new legislation needs to allow the company "to honor
the privacy and security promised we make to our customers." Despite
reports that the statement indicated a waning of support for CISPA,
Microsoft spokesperson Christina Pearson said that the company's
"position remains unchanged."

http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenbe ... rity-bill/
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-574257 ... nce-cispa/

http://www.h-online.com/security/news/i ... 65532.html
http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valle ... pa-support
[Editor's Note (Murray): The problem with CISPA is not that it does not
permit Big Data to respect the rights of its customers but that it
immunizes them from accountability for compromising it. It is little
wonder that Big Data favors the bill.]

_________________
"Where soulless singers sang over beats built by machines" - Ani DiFranco


Top
  Profile  
 

ICE Mod
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 3:37 pm 
User avatar
Yes...my real name is Steve..REALLY!

Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 8545
Location: Boston Area, MA
Bannings: Living on the edge.
The more I read, the more I'm convinced that there is no possible way that a law can be written to address this stuff. Every attempt is overly broad and thus problematic. I don't have an answer, but the things I've seen so far are not even close. We have to face it...technology moves far faster than any legislative body. There's no way laws are going to fix the problem that I can see.

_________________
Championships this Century...Red Sox-3, Yankees-1

Boston Red Sox - 2004, 2007 & 2013 World Series Champions!


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 3:51 pm 
User avatar
I HATE BRICKWALLED MUSIC AND CORPORATIONS!

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Posts: 22775
Location: The Pasture
My personal belief (& this may be skewed, it's based on my 54 year old world view) is the labels at least in the western countries need to treat file sharing like they used to treat radio stations: free advertising that a minority is going to tape on cassette (now called mp3) & never buy; but that many who like what they hear will purchase.

Maybe when it comes to the under 30's I've got it all wrong, but the sales figures would seem to indicate that is not the case.

It's seemed to me that since day 1 the RIAA members have been behind the curve & have stayed that way to this day.

To the industry: you're supposed to do things for your customers to encourage loyalty, not encourage hatred by suing your own customers!

_________________
"Where soulless singers sang over beats built by machines" - Ani DiFranco


Last edited by Geff R. on Fri May 04, 2012 4:20 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 3:53 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 10 Jun 2011
Posts: 2941
Geff R. wrote:
Lots of new stuff today. This first one would seem especially relevant in light of Linda's recent post.

Sans wrote:
--Federal Judge in NY Comes Down Hard on Copyright Trolls
(May 2, 2012)
A federal judge in New York has lashed out at copyright trolls,
plaintiffs who attempt to sue dozens of anonymous computer users in one
case for copyright violations, hoping to get each to settle for several
thousand dollars rather than go to trial. Judge Gary Brown points out
that it is erroneous to assume that the registered subscriber of an IP
address is the same person who uses that address to download content.
Judge Brown also pointed to the "abusive litigation tactics to extract
settlements from John Doe defendants." He allowed discovery to proceed
against the first defendant in each of the four cases that crossed his
desk; the plaintiffs were told that if they wanted to pursue legal
action against the rest of the defendants, they would have to pay filing
fees for each case.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news ... wsuits.ars
[Editor's Note (Murray): At last; a judge who will limit frivolous
suits. Where was this judge when someone sued over the wording of the
pledge of allegiance?]

See, this is a ruling that's been a long time coming. There's an attorney somewhere in Florida that's been making it difficult for cities to convict people using those red light cameras for very similar reasons--just as an IP address cannot indicate exactly who is using a particular computer, the tag number on a car cannot indicate who is driving that car. And, just as with red light cameras, there are lawyers looking to defend those subpoenaed in these cases:
Quote:
http://lslawpl.com/responding-subpoena-notices-copyright-troll-cases-filed-middle-district-florida-2/
Lalchandani Simon is preparing to respond to subpoena notices received by John Doe Defendants in several Middle District of Florida cases.

The past year has seen a tremendous increase in mass copyright cases filed by pornography companies against hundreds or thousands of nameless “Doe Defendants.” These cases are often used to force settlement payments out of potentially innocent defendants identified only by their IP addresses. Many of these cases settle because defendants are fearful or embarrassed at the prospect of having their actual identities linked to these pornographic downloads. Lalchandani Simon PL helps to defend John Does and will move to dismiss the case or quash discovery in order to protect our clients and prevent their personal information from being disclosed.

If you have received a notice from your ISP regarding the above case or similar matters, and would like to speak with our firm regarding your legal rights, please call (305) 999-LAW1 or e-mail info@lslawpl.com. Our attorneys are ready to address your needs 24/7.

Nu Image, Inc. v. Does 1 – 2,515, Case No. 2:2012cv00109
World Digital Rights, Inc. v. John Does 1-80, Case No. 2:2012cv00225
Voltage Pictures, LLC v. Does 1-2,514, Case No. 2:2012cv00217
Collins, Inc. v. Does 1-8, Case No.
John Stagliano, Inc. v. John Does 1-14, Case No. 3:2012cv00334
Malibu Media, LLC v. Does, Case No. 5:2012cv00159
Nucorp, Ltd v. John Does 1-11, Case No. 8:2012cv00665
Patrick Collins, Inc. v. Does 1-16, Case No. 6:2012cv00477
Raw Films, LTD v. John Does 1-11, Case No. 8:2012cv00667
Celestial, Inc. v. Does, Case No. 2:2012cv00082
Celestial, Inc. v. Does, Case No. 2:2012cv00083

(That said, I don't know what all of this has to do with the Pledge of Allegiance.)


Top
  Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 3:55 pm 
User avatar
I HATE BRICKWALLED MUSIC AND CORPORATIONS!

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Posts: 22775
Location: The Pasture
I'm with you on Red Light cameras (& speeding cameras); while I've never been caught by either, there are few things I despise more.

_________________
"Where soulless singers sang over beats built by machines" - Ani DiFranco


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 4:38 pm 
User avatar
Sonic Death Monkey

Joined: 22 Aug 2004
Posts: 4798
Location: Jet City
Bannings: 4
That's why in Europe they're smart enough to have the cameras take a picture that includes the driver. Kind of hard to dispute a ticket when it's your smiling face behind the wheel (I know this from experience).

Of course, while I was in Germany there was an instance (and picture) that made the front page of some papers since the driver was wearing a pig mask and couldn't be identified.

_________________
My home on the web:
http://www.alger-photography.com


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 4:43 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 10 Jun 2011
Posts: 2941
Walter P wrote:
The more I read, the more I'm convinced that there is no possible way that a law can be written to address this stuff. Every attempt is overly broad and thus problematic. I don't have an answer, but the things I've seen so far are not even close. We have to face it...technology moves far faster than any legislative body. There's no way laws are going to fix the problem that I can see.

The thing is--there are laws. This activity is illegal. Is it a cat-and-mouse game? Of course it is. Prostituton is against the law, but it still happens every day; the cops attempt to enforce the laws, but the results tend to be negligible. The problem with file-sharing stems from the notion that, unlike prostitutes and johns, the public generally believes that people caught file-sharing are victims.

Part of the problem is that the music industry cried wolf for many years. Home taping, used-CD sales, bootleg music--none of these activities cost the industry anything near what it claimed to be losing at the time. But I don't see how anybody can look at how the music industry has changed in the past ten or fifteen years and still liken file-sharing to home taping. It's like the whole Vince Gill thing--the inherent value of a piece of recorded music is next to nothing these days. Perhaps the question should be: with all of the music legally streaming for free these days, why are people still engaging in file-sharing?

I don't know--I guess people think I'm pro-SOPA, pro-Big Brother, pro-Gestapo tactics, whatever. I'm not--I'd like to see these laws evolve in a manner that will both allow copyright owners some tools to deal with those that infringe, yet also protect innocent consumers from getting burned by counterfeit or pirated merchandise. I was exchanging e-mails recently with a woman who was quite successful selling hand-made dresses on Ebay, but was forced to quit when sellers in Hong Kong were copying her designs within hours of her original listings and selling cheap knock-offs for 80% less. Copyright infrongement isn't something that only affects multi-national companies, or rich people who "already have enough money".

I'll admit--I've snagged a few MP3 files here and there. Well, more than a few. But what opened my eyes as a music collector was when I realized how much worse it has gotten for music consumers because of the effect of file-sharing--stores don't bother selling CD's any more; artists releasing vintage vault material are either charging exhorbitant sums for it, or offering it as $5 downloads. Older music by second-tier artists is starting to go out-of-print on CD, and will probably stay OOP indefinitely. Perhaps I'm merely lamenting the eclipse of an antiquated music delivery format, but I do think that this is about more than newer, more convenient technology making CD's obsolete--this is about an industry that is having quite a bit of difficulty sustaining itself financially when its officially sanctioned product is hemorrhaging perfect, free copies of itself.

No, I don't personally have the solution right now. And yes, I do agree that any solution that comes at the expense of our fundamental rights and liberties is a poor solution. But I do think that pursuing that solution is worthwhile, and no, I'm not part of the corrupt federal government or any other sinister, shadowy Big Brother organizations, and I'm not connected with any of the evil corporations--in other words, I'm not getting paid to post this. Do I care more about the corporations than I do about the music? Even if I did--so what? But no, not really.


Top
  Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 7:14 pm 
User avatar
Super Genius

Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 7242
Brainiac McGee wrote:
Yes, the value of recorded music has dropped drastically--a CD that cost something like $12-15 dollars back twenty-five years ago can today be found in a bin at Walmart for five bucks. God forbid I should come off like I'm "way more interested in record companies and $ than in music", but as a music collector, this devaluation is especially apparent--suddenly the only way to make a profit off of recorded music is to package it with a bunch of tchotkes and slap a hundred dollar price tag on it, or to sell it at or below cost so that it can promote a tour where tickets generally start at about $70-80 apiece (or whatever--I really don't go to these shows anymore.)


Well, that's media in general. If you wait long enough, the price comes down as it goes catalog. Witness DVDs - what is my incentive to buy something the first week or two it's out? That's when it's probably going to be at its highest price. And there were always cheapo albums, too - even outside the cutout bins. Add in that CDs were overpriced from the beginning and never did see the promised reduction in price - it's kind of hard to buy the argument that the music that was $8.98 on album was suddenly worth $16.98 on CD.

Brainiac McGee wrote:
Walter P wrote:
The more I read, the more I'm convinced that there is no possible way that a law can be written to address this stuff. Every attempt is overly broad and thus problematic. I don't have an answer, but the things I've seen so far are not even close. We have to face it...technology moves far faster than any legislative body. There's no way laws are going to fix the problem that I can see.

The thing is--there are laws. This activity is illegal. Is it a cat-and-mouse game? Of course it is. Prostituton is against the law, but it still happens every day; the cops attempt to enforce the laws, but the results tend to be negligible. The problem with file-sharing stems from the notion that, unlike prostitutes and johns, the public generally believes that people caught file-sharing are victims.

Part of the problem is that the music industry cried wolf for many years. Home taping, used-CD sales, bootleg music--none of these activities cost the industry anything near what it claimed to be losing at the time. But I don't see how anybody can look at how the music industry has changed in the past ten or fifteen years and still liken file-sharing to home taping. It's like the whole Vince Gill thing--the inherent value of a piece of recorded music is next to nothing these days. Perhaps the question should be: with all of the music legally streaming for free these days, why are people still engaging in file-sharing?

I don't know--I guess people think I'm pro-SOPA, pro-Big Brother, pro-Gestapo tactics, whatever. I'm not--I'd like to see these laws evolve in a manner that will both allow copyright owners some tools to deal with those that infringe, yet also protect innocent consumers from getting burned by counterfeit or pirated merchandise. I was exchanging e-mails recently with a woman who was quite successful selling hand-made dresses on Ebay, but was forced to quit when sellers in Hong Kong were copying her designs within hours of her original listings and selling cheap knock-offs for 80% less. Copyright infrongement isn't something that only affects multi-national companies, or rich people who "already have enough money".

I'll admit--I've snagged a few MP3 files here and there. Well, more than a few. But what opened my eyes as a music collector was when I realized how much worse it has gotten for music consumers because of the effect of file-sharing--stores don't bother selling CD's any more; artists releasing vintage vault material are either charging exhorbitant sums for it, or offering it as $5 downloads. Older music by second-tier artists is starting to go out-of-print on CD, and will probably stay OOP indefinitely. Perhaps I'm merely lamenting the eclipse of an antiquated music delivery format, but I do think that this is about more than newer, more convenient technology making CD's obsolete--this is about an industry that is having quite a bit of difficulty sustaining itself financially when its officially sanctioned product is hemorrhaging perfect, free copies of itself.

No, I don't personally have the solution right now. And yes, I do agree that any solution that comes at the expense of our fundamental rights and liberties is a poor solution. But I do think that pursuing that solution is worthwhile, and no, I'm not part of the corrupt federal government or any other sinister, shadowy Big Brother organizations, and I'm not connected with any of the evil corporations--in other words, I'm not getting paid to post this. Do I care more about the corporations than I do about the music? Even if I did--so what? But no, not really.


You're right - a good bit of the problems have been brought on the industry by their own actions. But the ridiculously inflated loss claims really hurt them. Yes. Stealing music is wrong - I don't think anyone's arguing that point. But younger kids don't view downloading as stealing - it's their radio. And given how narrow radio formats have become, no wonder - it's hard to find anything different on the radio. But that's another story.

The industry's idea of punishment was totally and fully out of line with the crime. Especially when they argued that it wasn't that the music was downloaded, it's that it was available. Remember - they weren't whacking these folks for downloading the music, but for sharing the music. With no burden of proof that anyone had actually downloaded the music. But if you walked into a store and stole a CD (or a bunch of CDs), your potential punishment was far less than if you got dinged for sharing a single song online. People faced financial ruin for this - hardly a just punishment considering the crime. It's more akin to cutting off your hand for stealing an apple.

And if you dug past the industry's claims, while this was going on, THEY WERE MAKING PROFITS. That's not what they claimed - remember, they were "losing money". No, they were making smaller than expected profits. And then they started releasing less product and bemoaning how sales were down. Well, duh. Someone broke the numbers down - total sales were indeed down. But average sales per release were UP.

It's a complex problem that requires a more complex solution than they're proposing, but I know this - anyone who thinks it's worth giving up our rights to solve it to the industry's satisfaction will never understand. The problem is the whip maker wants to punish the car buyer for not supporting his business model when it's his model that needs to adapt.

Alan

_________________
Alan

"Keepin' it classy, all the way to Christmas!" - Craig Ferguson


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 7:29 pm 
User avatar
I HATE BRICKWALLED MUSIC AND CORPORATIONS!

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Posts: 22775
Location: The Pasture
alantig wrote:
But if you walked into a store and stole a CD (or a bunch of CDs), your potential punishment was far less than if you got dinged for sharing a single song online.

Alan

That's a really good point that I've never heard before. In retrospect, I'm very surprised attorney's haven't used it. It should be a winning legal argument. (Sure you're not an attorney?) :thumbsup:

_________________
"Where soulless singers sang over beats built by machines" - Ani DiFranco


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 7:36 pm 
User avatar
Sonic Death Monkey

Joined: 22 Aug 2004
Posts: 4798
Location: Jet City
Bannings: 4
More...

Quote:
Critics say feds, RIAA too closely linked in music site seizure
Records unsealed this week show the U.S. government couldn't produce evidence that Dajaz1.com violated copyright law even after a year, largely because authorities couldn't get it from music labels.

by Greg Sandoval May 4, 2012 1:49 PM PDT (Credit: Greg Sandoval/CNET)
Critics of the U.S. government's antipiracy efforts have new ammunition to support claims that authorities are too eager to do the bidding of copyright owners.
Authorities seized Dajaz1.com, a music blog, and held onto it for more than a year before returning the domain to the owners. This only occurred after the government repeatedly failed to produce evidence that the site had violated copyright laws. David Kravets of Wired.com first reported the story.
This appears to be the latest public-relations setbacks for the large entertainment companies lobbying Congress for tougher antipiracy laws. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a group that advocates on behalf of Internet users and tech companies, blasted away at the secrecy involved in snatching a Web site and "muzzling" site owners without due process.
"The whole story is, in a word, appalling," EFF wrote on the group's blog. "U.S. taxpayers and their representatives have an object lesson, if one were needed, in why the government should not be granted new IP enforcement powers and why we need to reconsider the inclusion of copyright infringement as a basis for civil seizure and forfeiture."
Dajaz1.com, which focused on hip-hop music, was confiscated by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Bureau (ICE) in November 2010 as part of a two-year effort that has resulted in the closure of more than 700 Web sites. Over and over again, the court asked the government to produce evidence and fails to do so -- largely because the Recording Industry Association of American didn't provide the information to ICE officials, Wired reported.
Wired.com, teamed with EFF and California First Amendment Coalition, to get the records in the case unsealed.
The RIAA declined to comment but pointed Wired.com and CNET to a statement it made in December when the government returned the Dajaz1.com domain to owners.
"Criminal proceedings are not always brought, for a variety of appropriate reasons," the RIAA said. "With respect to Dajaz1, we would note that this particular Web site has specialized in the massive unauthorized distribution of pre-release music -- arguably the worst and most damaging form of digital theft...If the site continues to operate in an illegal manner, we will consider all our legal options to prevent further damage to the music community."

_________________
My home on the web:
http://www.alger-photography.com


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 7:36 pm 
User avatar
Sonic Death Monkey

Joined: 22 Aug 2004
Posts: 4798
Location: Jet City
Bannings: 4
damn, double post.

_________________
My home on the web:
http://www.alger-photography.com


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 8:16 pm 
User avatar
I HATE BRICKWALLED MUSIC AND CORPORATIONS!

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Posts: 22775
Location: The Pasture
Why did this happen? The usual reason wealthy lobbyists get their way......... $'s given to less than moral politicians.

_________________
"Where soulless singers sang over beats built by machines" - Ani DiFranco


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2012 11:47 pm 
User avatar
I HATE BRICKWALLED MUSIC AND CORPORATIONS!

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Posts: 22775
Location: The Pasture
Sans wrote:
--Court Records Unsealed in Dajaz1 Domain Name Seizure
(May 3 & 4, 2012)
Recently unsealed court records show that the U.S. government seized the
Dajaz1 domain name and held it for more than a year while waiting
additional information from the Recording Industry Association of
America (RIAA). The court records were obtained through a joint request
from the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the First Amendment
Coalition. The documents used to seize the domain cited four links to
pre-release songs, allegedly violating copyright law. Dajaz1's attorney
says the company complied with the DMCA takedown procedure; it also
appears that some of the songs may have been leaked by the music labels
that own them to stir up interest in the forthcoming albums. The
unsealed court documents raise some serious questions about the domain
seizure procedure in copyright violation cases - in particular, it is
concerning that there was not sufficient evidence when the domain was
seized; the government applied for repeated extensions before the domain
was finally returned, without comment, in December 2011.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news ... months.ars
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/0 ... e-seizure/

_________________
"Where soulless singers sang over beats built by machines" - Ani DiFranco


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Fri May 11, 2012 4:20 pm 
User avatar
I HATE BRICKWALLED MUSIC AND CORPORATIONS!

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Posts: 22775
Location: The Pasture
Sans wrote:
--The Pirate Bay Criticizes Anonymous DDoS Attack Against Virgin Media
(9th May 2012)
The Pirate Bay has come out and criticized the collective hacktivist
group known as Anonymous for its recent DDoS attack against the UK based
ISP Virgin Media. The Pirate Bay likened the attack to censoring the
Internet and argued the actions by Anonymous were as bad as those they
claimed to be protesting against. Anonymous claimed the attack against
Virgin Media was in retaliation to the ISP complying to a court order
forcing it to block access for its customers to the Pirate Bay file
sharing site. The Pirate Bay statement, which was issued on their
FaceBook page, said "We do not encourage these actions. We believe in
the open and free internets, where anyone can express their views ...
So don't fight them using their ugly methods. DDoS and blocks are both
forms of censorship." The statement went on to request activists to
focus instead on mounting legal protests
http://www.v3.co.uk/v3-uk/news/2173370/ ... dos-attack
http://www.scmagazineuk.com/the-pirate- ... le/240265/

_________________
"Where soulless singers sang over beats built by machines" - Ani DiFranco


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Fri May 11, 2012 4:21 pm 
User avatar
I HATE BRICKWALLED MUSIC AND CORPORATIONS!

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Posts: 22775
Location: The Pasture
Sans wrote:

--ACTA Unlikely to be Ratified in Europe
(8th May 2012)
The EU Commissioner for the Digital Agenda, Neelie Kroes, has admitted
that the controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, known as
ACTA, will most likely not now be ratified within the European Union.
In reaction to the large public outcry against ACTA, Kroes, speaking at
the recent Freedom Re:Publica Conference in Berlin, said that "we are
now likely to be in a world without Sopa and ACTA" and that "now we need
to find solutions to make the internet a place of freedom, openness, and
innovation fit for all citizens". ACTA has already been signed by 22
of the 27 member states of the EU but a number of those governments have
not yet ratified the treaty into national law due to public pressure.
The European Court of Justice will also investigate whether the
agreement breaches fundamental human rights.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/20 ... rope-kroes
http://www.siliconrepublic.com/careers/ ... o-be-in-a/

http://www.thejournal.ie/eu-digital-aff ... 39719-May2

_________________
"Where soulless singers sang over beats built by machines" - Ani DiFranco


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Fri May 11, 2012 4:22 pm 
User avatar
I HATE BRICKWALLED MUSIC AND CORPORATIONS!

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Posts: 22775
Location: The Pasture
Sans wrote:
--UK Government Outlines Internet Surveillance Plans
(9th May 2012)
The UK government has used the Queen's speech to outline their
controversial proposals to increase the ability of the police and
security forces to monitor emails, phone calls and Internet use. In her
speech the Queen told parliament "My Government intends to bring forward
measures to maintain the ability of the law enforcement and intelligence
agencies to access vital communications data under strict safeguards to
protect the public, subject to scrutiny of draft clauses." No further
details on these "measures" were presented. Civil liberties groups and
privacy campaigners have expressed dismay at the plan. Security experts
argue that current legislation is outdated and are not designed for
social media networks, Skype and other modern Internet communication
methods.
http://www.v3.co.uk/v3-uk/news/2173470/ ... ping-plans
http://www.scmagazineuk.com/queens-spee ... le/240267/
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-18003315
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/374533/gove ... b-snooping

http://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/vi ... ions-data/


_________________
"Where soulless singers sang over beats built by machines" - Ani DiFranco


Top
  Profile  
 

IMWAN Admin
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2012 3:59 am 
User avatar
Helpful Librarian

Joined: 13 Jan 1966
Posts: 104470
Location: IMWAN Towers
Bannings: If you're not nice
Quote:
MP3tunes goes bankrupt due to record industry

Music is ending for MP3tunes.com, the service created by Michael Robertson in 2005 as a “cyber locker” ahead of its times and inevitably sued by the record industry for copyright infringement. The company filed for bankruptcy in the Southern District of California, and its founder isn’t wary of directly accusing the music majors for this unfortunate outcome.

Already well known for MP3.com and his Lindows/Linspire project, Robertson funded MP3tunes to let people share their music with others and access it on-line from any device – in DRM-less digital format and with no need to pay a single cent to the copyright-owning labels.

MP3tunes was obviously taken to court by one of these labels (EMI), a case filed in 2007 and that still has to celebrate a proper trial. Robertson now explains that after four years of fruitless legal cost, “MP3tunes has no choice but to file” for bankruptcy.

It’s how the “Big Four” of the recording industry operate, the entrepreneur states, “the labels engage in multiyear legal battles and put small companies through hell for years” so that they don’t have the opportunity to flourish and develop their business.

MP3tunes is going bankrupt with debts valued between 1 million and 10 million dollars, while Robertson previously managed to get a now–Pyrrhic victory when a court in Manhattan judged that his company was not liable of violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) for letting its users download audio tracks with no known legal status.

http://www.neowin.net/news/mp3tunes-goe ... d-industry

_________________
Image


Top
  Profile  
 

IMWAN Admin
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2012 4:00 am 
User avatar
Helpful Librarian

Joined: 13 Jan 1966
Posts: 104470
Location: IMWAN Towers
Bannings: If you're not nice
Quote:
DVDs and Blu-rays will now carry two unskippable government warnings

You know those FBI warning messages that appear at the beginning of DVDs and Blu-ray discs? They're getting an upgrade—and they're multiplying.

The US government yesterday rolled out not one but two copyright notices, one to "warn" and one to "educate." Six major movie studios will begin using the new notices this week.

The main change is that Immigrations & Customs Enforcement (ICE) has, in the last several years, made itself a key player in the copyright wars. The FBI has shown extremely limited interest in going after individual websites, but ICE has done so with gusto; it has so far seized more than 750 domain names after rightsholder complaints. This new prominence is reflected in the broader logos used.

ICE now appears on both notices. The first notice shows the traditional FBI seal and a warning that "the unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this copyrighted work is illegal. Criminal copyright infringement is investigated by federal law enforcement agencies and is punishable by up to 5 years in prison and a fine of $250,000." The logo for ICE's Homeland Security Investigations unit now appears beside the FBI's.

Image
Banner number one. Now with "more logo"

The second notice shows the logo for the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center, which involves 20 different US government agencies. It features one extremely angry eagle who would probably pluck your eyeballs from your sockets if he could get those talons near you. "Piracy is not a victimless crime," says the notice. "For more information on how digital theft harms the economy, please visit www.iprcenter.gov.

Image
The educational message.

Will the two screens be shown back to back? Will each screen last for 10 seconds each? Will each screen be unskippable? Yes, yes, and yes.

An ICE spokesman tells me that the two screens will "come up after the previews, once you hit the main movie/play button on the DVD. At which point the movie rating comes up, followed by the IPR Center screen shot for 10 secs and then the FBI/HSI anti-piracy warning for 10 secs as well. Neither can be skipped/fast forwarded through."

The idea isn't to deter current pirates, apparently (the new scheme requires all legal purchasers to sit through 20 seconds of warnings each time they pop in a film, but will be totally absent from pirated downloads and bootlegs). It's to educate everyone else. As ICE Director John Morton announced in a statement yesterday, "Law enforcement must continue to expand how it combats criminal activity; public awareness and education are a critical part of that effort."

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012 ... -warnings/

_________________
Image


Top
  Profile  
 

IMWAN Mod
 Post subject: Copyright legal issues in the news
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2012 9:45 am 
User avatar
The Modfather; Wizard of WAN

Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 47296
Location: Under the Iron Bridge
Bannings: freely handed out
Way to learn absolutely nothing and continue treating your customers as criminals, MPAA.


Top
  Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Go to page 1 ... 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 ... 42  ( Previous  |  Next )
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 922 posts ]   



Who is WANline

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powdered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Closed captioning provided by the spirit of Gardner Fox.

IMWAN is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide
a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com, amazon.ca and amazon.co.uk.