A couple of weeks ago, I wrote this post about an amicus brief filed on behalf of several Internet companies seeking a new ruling in a 2004 case with the apparent purpose of changing the legal standard applied to the “Dancing Baby” case. This is in regard to the burden on a rights holder to “consider fair use” before issuing ...
In August, I wrote a post criticizing the editorial board of The New York Times for espousing Silicon Valley talking points rather than considering the broader aspects of a case concerning the International Trade Commission (ITC). At issue was the ITC’s claim that it had the authority to enjoin the importation of digital data being used by a company called ...
What do a bunch of puppies, a pretty woman, a dancing baby, Demi Moore, some Rastafarians, and 20 million books all have in common? They all refer to prominent, copyright-related cases* from which a content creator could—if he has nothing better to do—learn something about fair use doctrine. But even if an independent artist were to study Rogers v Koons ...
The recording industry last week filed suit against a new music platform called Aurous. With a Spotify-like interface, the app is designed to search, retrieve, and play music files, whether they’re stored on legal platforms or on BitTorrent sites around the world. And according to early reports, the primary function is the sourcing of pirated media on BitTorrent sites, leading ...
Attorney and blogger Chris Castle writes in The Huffington Post that it is the government’s responsibility to define the intent of safe harbor provisions in the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Arguing common-sensically that these safe harbors could not have been designed to shield massive and repeated infringements, like the volume that exists on YouTube, Castle says that it is ...
