 A & M Records vs. Napster (2001)  This is one of the most famous cases of copyright infringement related to the music industry. As peer to peer file sharing increased, Napster started a website. This website offered downloads of songs of all genre – new and old. You may know someone who used it.  A & M Records brought in a joint copyright infringement case which accused Napster of stealing music and making it available to people worldwide. Before closing the site in 2002, Napster had to settle USD26 million to different recording companies and songwriters. It could have even more if Napster had not apologized and folded the site.  Several websites still thrive on offering free music to people who can download it at no cost. The Napster case, though an example of the consequences, still does not act as a deterrent for other music websites that offer free music downloads (Bright Hub 2011)

 TVShack.net (2012)  Richard O’Dwyer, an enterprising 24-year-old college student from northern England, has found himself in the middle of a fierce battle between two of America’s great exports: Hollywood and the Internet.  At issue is a Web site he started that helped visitors find American movies and television shows online. Although the site did not serve up pirated content, American authorities say it provided links to sites that did. The Obama administration is seeking to extradite Mr. O’Dwyer from Britain on criminal charges of copyright infringement. The possible punishment: 10 years in a United States prison.  The case is the government’s most far-reaching effort so far to crack down on foreigners suspected of breaking American laws. It is unusual because it goes after a middleman, who the authorities say made a fair amount of money by pointing people to pirated content. Mr. O’Dwyer’s backers say the prosecution goes too far, squelching his free-speech right to publish links to other Web sites. (The New York Times)

 The Happy Birthday Song  Ever wonder why restaurants like Applebee's developed their own celebration songs to sing to customers on their birthdays instead of pulling out the tried-and-true "Happy Birthday to You"? Copyright laws.  In 1990, Warner Chappell purchased the company owning the copyright for $15 million, with the value of "Happy Birthday" estimated at $5 million  The copyright to the most popular song in the English language belongs now to Warner Music Group, and the company regularly charges up to $30,000 to anyone who wants to use the song for profit -- whether it's played in a film, sampled in a song, downloaded as a ring tone or sung at a chain restaurant.  Though there have been some questions posed about the validity of the copyright, up until this point, it has proven more cost- effective to simply pay to use the song than take the issue to court. (Suite )

 T-Mobile claims the color Magenta Now that T-Mobile is claiming the color Magenta, no other telecommunication companies can make use of this color without risking the chance being sued by T-Mobile.  Art.4 Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on Community Trademarks goes for this case as well. T-Mobile wants to distinguish itself within the Telecommunication Industry by using the color Magenta.  If a telecommunication company would use the color magenta. T-Mobile can fall back on Art.9:  Lava Graphic Design in Amsterdam has already created a site to fight for magenta’s rights to be free to use by all. It has received enormous repercussion so far. (Trendhunter 2008)

 DMCA: It criminalizes production and dissemination of technology, devices, or services intended to circumvent measures that control access to copyrighted works.  SOPA / PIPA: laws proposed in the US Congress to stop the act of ‘piracy’. (not approved)  LEb_D2SD3k&feature=related LEb_D2SD3k&feature=related

 Discussion points:  To What extent should you be allowed to copyright something?  Norms changed, rules need to change?  Should we change the markets, or change the way we apply the ‘rules’.