Presentation on theme: "Copyright Law Ronald W. Staudt Class 21 April 8, 2009."— Presentation transcript:
Copyright Law Ronald W. Staudt Class 21 April 8, 2009
Digital Piracy Spreads, and Defies a Fix By MICHAEL CIEPLY Published: April 6, Less than a week after a pirated copy of the unreleased movie “X-Men Origins: Wolverine” popped up on the Internet, federal legislators and entertainment executives presented an extraordinarily bleak picture of the damage digital piracy can inflict, and the grim prospects for limiting it. At a Monday morning Congressional field hearing here, lawmakers and executives both described a deteriorating situation in which $20 billion annually in copyrighted movies, music and other entertainment are being lost to global piracy networks that are tolerated or encouraged by countries like China, Russia, India and — in a case that drew special attention — Canada.
AP, news industry tout new effort to fight Web news piracy By Elliot Spagat Associated Press 04/06/2009 The Associated Press and the newspaper industry plan an aggressive effort to track down copyright violators on the Internet and try to divert traffic from Web sites that don't properly license news content, the AP board announced today. The not-for-profit news cooperative also said it will cut fees by $35 million for U.S. newspapers in 2010 — on top of a $30 million reduction that took effect this year — and loosen its long-standing requirement for two years' notice to cancel AP service. The financial moves are part of an overhaul of the AP's policies in the face of extraordinary financial hardship for newspapers. The changes were announced at the AP's annual meeting in San Diego, along with the copyright initiative launched by the AP's board, which is made up largely of newspaper executives. "We can no longer stand by and watch others walk off with our work under misguided legal theories," said Dean Singleton, the AP's chairman and the chief executive of newspaper publisher MediaNews Group, parent company of the Mercury News. "We are mad as hell, and we are not going to take it any more."
Class Overview zCartoon Network- ydigital technologies and 106 (1) & 106(4) zRight to Make Phonorecords yMusical compositions and compulsory licenses--115 xKaraoke, ringtones, XM-MP3 yReproductiion rights in sound recordings—114 xRemix, mash ups and Bridgeport zPerformance right in sound recordings yMusical composition performance right ySound recording performance right by digital audio transmission zRight of Public Display ySect 106(5) and its exceptions yPerfect 10 and Google
Cartoon Network v. 20 th Century Fox, 536 F. 3d 121 (2008) Who is copying?– 20 th Century v. Cablevision Supp. p 67 How does RS-DVR work? Where is the copy? Arroyo Server? Where is the server? Is RS-DVR the same as a VCR or local DVR? Who is performing? 20 th Century v. Cablevision Supp. p 98
Right to Make Phonorecords Musical compositions and compulsory licenses--115 –Karaoke, –ringtones, –XM-MP3
Section 115 zWhen phonorecords of a nondramatic musical work have been distributed to the public in the United States under the authority of the copyright owner, any other person, including those who make phonorecords or digital phonorecord deliveries, may, by complying with the provisions of this section, obtain a compulsory license to make and distribute phonorecords of the work.
Right to Make Phonorecords yReproduction rights in sound recordings—114 xRemix, mash ups and Bridgeport Elvis Costello – Radio, Radio Gregg Gillis- Girl Talk
§ 114. Scope of exclusive rights in sound recordings z(a) The exclusive rights of the owner of copyright in a sound recording are limited to the rights specified by clauses (1), (2), (3) and (6) of section 106, and do not include any right of performance under section 106(4).section 106,section 106(4). z(b) The exclusive right of the owner of copyright in a sound recording under clause (1) of section 106 is limited to the right to duplicate the sound recording in the form of phonorecords or copies that directly or indirectly recapture the actual sounds fixed in the recording. The exclusive right of the owner of copyright in a sound recording under clause (2) of section 106 is limited to the right to prepare a derivative work in which the actual sounds fixed in the sound recording are rearranged, remixed, or otherwise altered in sequence or quality. The exclusive rights of the owner of copyright in a sound recording under clauses (1) and (2) of section 106 do not extend to the making or duplication of another sound recording that consists entirely of an independent fixation of other sounds, even though such sounds imitate or simulate those in the copyrighted sound recording.section 106
Performance right in sound recordings yMusical composition performance right xSection 106(4) -- Cartoon Network, Aveco etc, ASCAP etc xSection 115 – Digital Phonorecord deliveries? ySound recording performance right by digital audio transmission xSection 106(6)—” in the case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission.”
Right of Public Display zSect 106(5) and its exceptions y“in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyrighted work publicly” yPlayboy cases and RTC v. Netcom zPerfect 10 and Google supp p. 99 yServer test yThumbnails and full sized in-line linked imagesThumbnails and full sized in-line linked images