Category Archives: Copyright Law

Marketing Online for Legal Professionals

It requires a lot of work to get your firm launched but the work doesn’t end there. You must also work hard to get your organization’s name out there. And it isn’t only law firms that must do this – it applies to all firms that wish to be effective. Continue reading

Posted in Advertising Law, Business law, Copyright Law, Intellectual Property | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

A Domain Dispute Attorney: For When Your Domain is at Risk

A corporation’s domain address is one of its most cherished items in preserving an online reputation. Because of this, optimal care and diligence needs to be applied when managing it. Continue reading

Posted in Advertising Law, Copyright Law, Intellectual Property | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Friday Footlights

Friday is traditionally the day that the IPKat will remind readers of all the lovely events that grace the, aptly titled, forthcoming events page. For those in search of an IP conference or seminar fix over the coming months, or indeed just in search of a few quick CPD points, there is no better place! Recently added events include the UCL IBIL Masterclass on Employee Inventions on 2 November, however there are plenty of others to suit any tastes. Earlier in the week CoolBrands – which in its own words has "Since 2001 …been canvassing the opinions of experts and consumers to produce a barometer of Britain's coolest brands, people and places" – produced its latest list of the top 20 coolest brands in the UK. Judged by a combination of expert panel [Merpel wonders if "expert of cool" is something that can appear on one's CV] and public vote. What makes a brand cool, I hear you ask? Well, from a starting pool of 1500 brands, the final 20 were selected based on responses to their: style; innovation; originality; authenticity; desirability; and uniqueness [Aaah, the shifting sands of opinion-based research…]. The top 10, is as follows: 1. Aston Martin 2. Apple 3. Harley-Davidson 4. Rolex 5. Bang & Olufsen 6. BlackBerry 7. Google 8. Ferrari 9. Nike 10. YouTube Just over a year ago, the IPKat reported on the activities of a company called Righthaven LLC, which was being widely proclaimed as the first of a new species: the Copyright Troll. Righthaven's model of business was one of sub-contracted enforcement. Having no copyright of its own, the company extracted sums on behalf of clients that signed up to its services: rummaging through the cluttered contents of the web in search of potential infringers to bring to justice. Righthaven's infamy has even caused a wikipedia entry (which, as everyone knows, is the true measure of fame/infamy and success/abject failure) to spring into being. Whereas business was initially good, things soon started to unravel, and reports flooded onto the web earlier this month that Righthaven may be about to fall into bankruptcy following a costs order made against it. Adding to the company's woes, earlier this week a Colorado District Court threw out Righthaven's case against a Mr Leland Wolf, whom it had accused of infringing a Denver Post photograph by parodying it on his blog. [A copy of the Order is hosted by the Electronic Frontier Foundation here]. The Denver Post had provided Righthaven with a right to sue for infringement, but as Judge John L. Kane explained: "A third-party who has been assigned the bare right to sue for infringement has no interest in the legal dissemination of the copyrighted material. On the contrary, that party derives its sole economic benefit by instituting claims of infringement, a course of action which necessarily limits public access to the copyrighted work. This prioritizes economic benefit over public access, in direct contradiction to the constitutionally mandated equilibrium upon which copyright law is based." Accordingly, the Court threw out the case on the basis that Righthaven simply did not have the standing to bring an action. Potentially more importantly however, over 50 other that had been filed before the Court were stayed pending a motion to dismiss. Clearly more thought needs to go into some of the mechanics before Righthaven is able to franchise its model to the masses… An olive branch at last? What week would go by without more fun and frolics between those Behemoths of the electronics industy, Samsung and Apple? With legal proceedings flying left, right and centre, and claims and counterclaims bouncing off the walls of courts from the Netherlands to Australia, the IPKat was fearful that there would be no end to the litigation – a modern take on the story of Sisyphus, each company thinking that they have finally got the litigation stone to the top of the hill only to find it being pushed back down by the weight of another suit against it. This week's story is of a somewhat peculiar nature, as Bloomberg (amongst others) reports that "Samsung Electronics Co. made a proposal to Apple Inc. to resolve their patent dispute in Australia regarding touch-screen technology." No details have yet been given about what treasures Samsung might have offered to placate its fruity rival, but according to Engadget "Stephen Burley [Apple's lawyer], acknowledged that "[Samsung's] inconvenience would be diminished and we would be comforted" by an agreement." The saga continues….. To continue reading this legal news please click Read full information...

Posted in Copyright Law | Tagged , | Leave a comment

3 Count: Piracy Killer

Have any suggestions for the 3 Count? Let me know via Twitter @plagiarismtoday. 1: Dylan Paintings Draw Scrutiny First off today, musician Bob Dylan is drawing controversy over his recent series of paintings, "The Asia Series", as it appears at least some of them may not have been painted from his experiences in Asia, as the gallery promised, but from well-known photographs. Two of the paintings in particular "Trade" and "Opium" appear to copy the composition of earlier photographs almost exactly. The Gagosian Gallery, where the paintings are on display, released a statement saying that: "While the composition of some of Bob Dylan's paintings is based on a variety of sources, including archival, historic images, the paintings' vibrancy and freshness come from the colors and textures found in everyday scenes he observed during his travels." 2: Spotify Is Killing Piracy (in Sweden, at Least) Next up today, music streaming service Spotify appears to be having a profound impact on piracy, at least in Sweden. The country is reporting a 25% drop in illegal music downloads following the launch of Spotify. Music streaming has also become the most popular way for obtaining music in the country, with 40% of users engaging in it, which is 4x the 10% who admitted to pirating content. 3: NinjaVideo Founders Plead Guilty to Copyright Infringement Finally today, another former administrator at NinjaVideo has plead guilty to criminal copyright infringement. Hana Beshara plead guilty yesterday for her involvement in the site, which was shuttered in June 2010 by having its domain seized. Criminal charges were filed agianst 5 administrators earlier this month. Beshara, according to the criminal complaint, was the day-to-day administrator of the site. She joins David Howard Smith, who plead guilty last week, in signing plea deals over their involvement with the site. Suggestions That's it for the three count today. We will be back tomorrow with three more copyright links. If you have a link that you want to suggest a link for the column or have any proposals to make it better. Feel free to leave a comment or send me an email. I hope to hear from you. Want the Full Story? Tune in every Wednesday evening at 5 PM ET for the live recording of the Copyright 2.0 Show or wait and get the edited version Friday right here on Plagiarism Today. The 3 Count Logo was created by Justin Goff and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License... To continue reading this legal news please click Read full information...

Posted in Copyright Law | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Announcing Creepy Copyright Mondays in October

People who know me personally know that I am a huge fan of Halloween, horror movies and all things that go "bump" in the night. Every year I take a lot of time off in October to work on a small New Orleans-area haunted house I run and will likely be doing so again this year, at least later in the month. However, this year I wanted to combine my passion for copyright/plagiarism issues with my passion for Halloween and do something special for Plagiarism Today. So, all month during Halloween we'll be talking copyright and horror every Monday. We'll start this coming Monday talking about the copyright challenges my better half, Crystal, and I faced when creating our new horror movie review series, Garbage Horror, then we'll discuss how copyright law shaped the horror landscape, including our perception of zombies and vampires as well as some of our more modern characters. The month will conclude with a special Halloween-day post about great public domain horror movies you can enjoy Halloween night for free legally. All in all, I'm hoping it will be a fun but still educational look at the role copyright plays both in modern and older horror movies. If you're interested, last year I did a post about the copyright risks associated with Halloween, so you can understand some of the hazards associated with running your own haunted house or scary party. So stay tuned next week for the first posting in Creepy Copyright as we take a look at the copyright challenges in starting a horror review series….. To continue reading this legal news please click Read full information...

Posted in Copyright Law | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment