Industry Expert Blog: Podcast Reviews
The first podcast entitled “YouTube, MyTake” is from Intellectual Property Colloquium and is hosted by UCLA School of Law professor, Doug Lichtman. In this podcast, Lichtman discuss the lawsuit of Viacom v. Google. Lichtman is also an advisor for Viacom, which encouraged this podcast after he complied excerpts from both arguments of Viacom and Google.
Viacom’s argument is that Google is liable for copyright infringement due to its’ YouTube site allowing users to post copyrighted works without prior authorization. Viacom point is that Google is liable under both common and statutory law based on the business model they created and gained profits. Viacom sited the case of MGM Studios v. Grokster, in which the Court found Grokster liable of secondary liability doctrine because they provided their users software that contributed to the infringement. Viacom further argues that YouTube failed to use fingerprinting filtering technology and YouTube itself also participated in the unlawful reproduction of works and performances that they distributed to their third party affiliates. Although YouTube did not provide their users software, Viacom holds YouTube responsible because they profited from “Truckloads” of infringing videos.
Google believe they are not liable because they fall under the DMCA’s Safe Harbor provision, which does not hold the web site operator liable for content that is posted by its users, as long as the content is removed once notified by the rights-holder. The DMCA provision also does not require the site owners to monitor content. Therefore, Google does not have to incorporate a filtering technology although they have developed a fingerprinting system to minimize copyrighted material off their site.
I do believe that Google is responsible for their business practices; however I think this lawsuit is slightly frivolous. Some excerpts from this podcast and within this case show that Viacom had authorized clips to be uploaded to Youtube for the purpose of marketing and had also allowed some content that was uploaded illegally by users to remain on the site. Also, Viacom attempted to purchase YouTube, which confirm at one time they thought YouTube was a great investment, despite its reputation for building a business on piracy. With this information, is this lawsuit really due to copyright infringement or a lawsuit of bitterness for not being able to purchase the piracy giant?
The second podcast “Can content survive online?” is also from Intellectual Property Colloquium and ties into this subject. Brad Smith, General Counsel of Microsoft, Scott Martin, Executive VP of Paramount and Dan Cooper, VP of Business and Legal Affairs of MySpace, join Lichtman to discuss the struggling industries of music, motion pictures and publishing and the replacing of old mechanisms for new business models. Cooper discussed user content principles by incorporating filtering and takedown tools for unauthorized content. I like the idea that MySpace has added copyright school for its content users that have been blocked by filters or had their accounts deleted due to infringement.
The third podcast “Intellectual property for professional creators” is hosted by Chris Castle and in this podcast he talks with Songwriters Guild President Rick Carnes about current copyright issues. Carnes speaks on the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act that will give the Department of Justice tools to take down websites related to piracy. Carnes states this bill is good for consumers because it will free bandwidth is being overloaded by unauthorized content downloading, which is “clogging up the pipes”. I believe just as Carnes that this bill will not stop piracy, however, I do believe that this will slow down the number of websites that allow unauthorized uploads and illegal downloads, allowing artist to make a living doing what we love to do.
Apple iTunes: YouTube, MyTake
http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/intellectual-property-colloquium/id294158352
http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2004/2004_04_480
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2007/05/google-cites-safe-harbor-fair-use-in-viacom-v-youtube-defense.ars
Apple iTunes: Can Content Survive Online
http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/can-content-survive-online/id294158352?i=61743588
Apple iTunes: MusicTechPolicy.com Podcast: Intellectual Property for
Professional Creators - Songwriters Guild President Rick Carnes
http://itunes.apple.com/bw/podcast/musictechpolicy-com-podcast/id392020035
Sunday, May 29, 2011
Sunday, May 8, 2011
Intellectual Property Rights and The People Who Violate Them
Intellectual Property Rights and The People Who Violate Them.
By: Gigi Dowell
This month’s class is in Advance Entertainment Law and our area of focus for this week is on Intellectual Property rights. In my first article, “Intellectual Property Issues in Music” by Scott Palmer, touched on several IP cases from John Fogerty of the former band CCR being accused of IP infringement against him self to other well-know cases as Vanilla Ice vs. Queen and David Bowie and the biggest case of them all Metallica vs. Napster. Napster was the new musical revolution that spawned the file-share downloading industry and provided thousand of fans long-lost music of their favorite artists. In this case Napster was issued a lawsuit due to a discovered leak of the Metallica song “I Disappear”, which was soundtrack of the due to release Mission Impossible II movie. Metallica sued Napster for copyright infringement, unlawful use of digital audio interface device and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) (Palmer, 2010). Some would argue that this case was the end of music industry. I say, this IP case started a movement and sent a message to the record labels and artists that there is a huge need for new ways to access music.
My second article on the topic of Intellectual Property is a case study on Apple TV and iTunes. In 2007, Apple was hit with two lawsuits over the copyright infringement that included the artistic rights of a photographer and a song resembling a previous recording in 1979(AfterDawn, 2007). Within the first lawsuit, Apple TV was in negotiation with photographer, Louis Psihoyos, on his idea of a “video wall”. The negotiation deal was never settled, however, Apple TV was using this concept for advertisement of their Apple TV unit. In my opinion, this is a classic case of an idea being swiped by a large corporation. When presenting an idea to anybody, especially those who you are attempting to do business with, it is important to have the meeting party sign agreements of confidentiality in order to prevent a violation of rights.
The second civil lawsuit complaint against iTunes involved Avril Lavigne’s smash hit single “Girlfriend”. It was stated to be a copy of a song written by James Gangwer and Tommy Dunbar in 1979, entitled “I Wanna Be Your Boyfriend”. This case has the potential to be an issue with the actual artist rather than on iTunes. If Avril Lavigne were listed as the songwriter of the new song, you would think that she was at fault or at least the record company. ITunes was slated as being “an acting catalyst for music infringement” (AfterDawn, 2007). This claim I don’t agree with, because being a music seller through iTunes, it is up to the Artist, Artist Management or the record companies to make sure they acquire permissions and waivers in order to sample and or use other artist’s music.
The last article I chose for this discussion of Intellectual Property is an article acquired from Legal Zoom.com entitled “Top 5 Intellectual Property Disputes”. Legal Zoom.com was founded in 2001 and is an Internet source for easy to use legal forms as well as instant access to information on common legal matters. In this article, they highlighted the top 5 intellectual property issues listed in and out of the cyber world. This list included another lawsuit involving Napster with the RIAA, the case of Amazon’s 1-click patent and Google Trademark Keywords. Amazon patent the one step buying process and issued an infringement lawsuit against Barnes and Nobles, only after one month of receiving their patent. Barnes and Nobles also had an “Express Lane” technology, however, Amazon was the first to get the patent. This situation was truly first come, first serve. Since Amazon was the first to get the patent, they had the intellectual rights to demand that another company within the same market of competition release their technology.
With the rise of the Internet and it being the vital source for information on just about any and everything, we can expect infringements of Intellectual Property being an issue of concern. Intellectual Property is very important in order to preserve the legacy of the artistic craft, with the person or persons responsible for creating it. Knowing our creative rights and the rules and regulations on using the rights of others, we can start to figure a way to evolve into a new and improve way of satisfying the needs of content providers and content consumers.
AfterDawn. (2007). Apple is sued over artistic copyright infringement. Retrieved May 8, 2011, from http://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2007/07/08/apple_is_sued_over_artistic_copyright_infringement
Digital Enterprise. (2007) Case Study: ITunes Store. Retrieved May 7, 2010, from http://digitalenterprise.org/cases/itunes.html
Legal Zoom. (2009). Top 5 Intellectual Property Disputes. Retrieved May 8, 2011, from http://www.legalzoom.com/intellectual-property-rights/intellectual-property-basics/top-5-intellectual-property-disputes
Palmer,S. (2010). Intellectual Property Issues in Music. Retrieved May 8, 2011, from
http://class.georgiasouthern.edu/writling/professional/TechWrite/7-1/palmer/index.html
By: Gigi Dowell
This month’s class is in Advance Entertainment Law and our area of focus for this week is on Intellectual Property rights. In my first article, “Intellectual Property Issues in Music” by Scott Palmer, touched on several IP cases from John Fogerty of the former band CCR being accused of IP infringement against him self to other well-know cases as Vanilla Ice vs. Queen and David Bowie and the biggest case of them all Metallica vs. Napster. Napster was the new musical revolution that spawned the file-share downloading industry and provided thousand of fans long-lost music of their favorite artists. In this case Napster was issued a lawsuit due to a discovered leak of the Metallica song “I Disappear”, which was soundtrack of the due to release Mission Impossible II movie. Metallica sued Napster for copyright infringement, unlawful use of digital audio interface device and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) (Palmer, 2010). Some would argue that this case was the end of music industry. I say, this IP case started a movement and sent a message to the record labels and artists that there is a huge need for new ways to access music.
My second article on the topic of Intellectual Property is a case study on Apple TV and iTunes. In 2007, Apple was hit with two lawsuits over the copyright infringement that included the artistic rights of a photographer and a song resembling a previous recording in 1979(AfterDawn, 2007). Within the first lawsuit, Apple TV was in negotiation with photographer, Louis Psihoyos, on his idea of a “video wall”. The negotiation deal was never settled, however, Apple TV was using this concept for advertisement of their Apple TV unit. In my opinion, this is a classic case of an idea being swiped by a large corporation. When presenting an idea to anybody, especially those who you are attempting to do business with, it is important to have the meeting party sign agreements of confidentiality in order to prevent a violation of rights.
The second civil lawsuit complaint against iTunes involved Avril Lavigne’s smash hit single “Girlfriend”. It was stated to be a copy of a song written by James Gangwer and Tommy Dunbar in 1979, entitled “I Wanna Be Your Boyfriend”. This case has the potential to be an issue with the actual artist rather than on iTunes. If Avril Lavigne were listed as the songwriter of the new song, you would think that she was at fault or at least the record company. ITunes was slated as being “an acting catalyst for music infringement” (AfterDawn, 2007). This claim I don’t agree with, because being a music seller through iTunes, it is up to the Artist, Artist Management or the record companies to make sure they acquire permissions and waivers in order to sample and or use other artist’s music.
The last article I chose for this discussion of Intellectual Property is an article acquired from Legal Zoom.com entitled “Top 5 Intellectual Property Disputes”. Legal Zoom.com was founded in 2001 and is an Internet source for easy to use legal forms as well as instant access to information on common legal matters. In this article, they highlighted the top 5 intellectual property issues listed in and out of the cyber world. This list included another lawsuit involving Napster with the RIAA, the case of Amazon’s 1-click patent and Google Trademark Keywords. Amazon patent the one step buying process and issued an infringement lawsuit against Barnes and Nobles, only after one month of receiving their patent. Barnes and Nobles also had an “Express Lane” technology, however, Amazon was the first to get the patent. This situation was truly first come, first serve. Since Amazon was the first to get the patent, they had the intellectual rights to demand that another company within the same market of competition release their technology.
With the rise of the Internet and it being the vital source for information on just about any and everything, we can expect infringements of Intellectual Property being an issue of concern. Intellectual Property is very important in order to preserve the legacy of the artistic craft, with the person or persons responsible for creating it. Knowing our creative rights and the rules and regulations on using the rights of others, we can start to figure a way to evolve into a new and improve way of satisfying the needs of content providers and content consumers.
AfterDawn. (2007). Apple is sued over artistic copyright infringement. Retrieved May 8, 2011, from http://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2007/07/08/apple_is_sued_over_artistic_copyright_infringement
Digital Enterprise. (2007) Case Study: ITunes Store. Retrieved May 7, 2010, from http://digitalenterprise.org/cases/itunes.html
Legal Zoom. (2009). Top 5 Intellectual Property Disputes. Retrieved May 8, 2011, from http://www.legalzoom.com/intellectual-property-rights/intellectual-property-basics/top-5-intellectual-property-disputes
Palmer,S. (2010). Intellectual Property Issues in Music. Retrieved May 8, 2011, from
http://class.georgiasouthern.edu/writling/professional/TechWrite/7-1/palmer/index.html
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)