From the Techdirt Sycophants Department In his post of May 28, Mike Masnick dutifully opened his hymnal and joined the chorus in a rendition of “How to Criticize the CASE Act,” lending his bel canto to the refrain that the new law would create a “copyright trolling court.” As explained here and here, this is an inscrutable criticism because the ...
“Solicitude for certain current Internet practices fails to acknowledge the troubling effect the server rule has had on creators and copyright owners, particularly photographers, whose works become subject to mass unauthorized and uncompensated exploitation through third-party embedding. By converting the display right into an atrophied appendage of the reproduction right, the server rule ignores Congress’s endeavor to ensure that the ...
On Tuesday, Meredith Filak Rose of Public Knowledge posted a blog suggesting that a solution to rampant misinformation is to “bring libraries online.” Not surprisingly, she identifies copyright law as the barrier currently preventing access to quality information that could otherwise help solve the problem … “High-quality, vetted, peer-reviewed secondary sources are, unfortunately, increasingly hard to come by, online or off. ...
Last week, bills to create a new, small-claim copyright process were introduced in both the House and Senate. Generally referred to by the House name the CASE Act, the proposed changes to Title 17 will establish a Copyright Claims Board (CCB) at the U.S. Copyright Office with the purpose of offering rights holders a path to remedy infringements without the ...
Visual artists should be very relieved by last week’s decision at the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, overturning the District Court’s finding of fair use in Brammer v. Violent Hues. Frankly, fair use advocates should be happy about the ruling, too, because nobody who sincerely cares about copyright should celebrate an error of law. If a court simply disregards the ...
