Makers of an Arrested Development documentary are trying to raise money through Kickstarter to pay off licensing fees on some photos taken on the set of Arrested Development. This story examines whether FOX owns the copyrights to the photos at all (they almost certainly don’t) and the fair use argument that could be made if FOX is instead trying to claim copyright ownership of the set depicted in the photos.
Intellectual property is big business, as evidenced by this story about fights - both legal and not-so-legal - concerning whether or not Sherlock Holmes belongs in the public domain. One of the “not-so-legal” events? A Holmes scholar being strangled to death with a shoelace before an auction of letters written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.
Teller, of Penn & Teller fame, has filed a copyright infringement action regarding an illusion he invented as a teenager. A Dutch man has put a video on YouTube of himself doing the trick and offering to tell people the secret… for a price. If this case goes forward, it could result in an interesting opinion about the intellectual property rights afforded to magicians’ illusions.
Unfortunately for Teller, the man has so far been able to evade process. And the judge has denied Teller’s request to have the jury comprised entirely of magicians. (The judge was probably afraid they’d find ways to disappear from the jury box.)
This is a pretty comprehensive but accessible article that explains some of the nuances of U.S. copyright law, including fair use, and how it applies to fan fiction and fan art.
A trailer for a new movie Disney is advertising as a video game version of Toy Story. It looks funny, but my first thought was “why would they spend all the money to get the rights to characters like Bowser when they could just create a pastiche character?” (Clearly there is something wrong with me.)
I always try to give proper credit when posting stuff here, but now I’m almost afraid to ever push “Reblog” again.
It’s important to note that just giving credit isn’t enough to avoid infringement. Nor is saying “no copyright infringement intended.”
Did you know that when VCRs were released, the film industry went crazy, fearing that the new devices would destroy their ability to make money off their copyrights? Or the MP3 players were nearly banned due to overinclusive bills?
I actually read the Sony case and discussed the Souza testimony in law school.
Remember when I posted the story about certain internet sites going “dark” to protest SOPA? Looks like it has a date: January 18th. That could end up being my most productive day in YEARS.
MSNBC reports on a proposed plan by some websites - including Twitter, Google, Etsy, Wikipedia, and Etsy - to shut down services in protest of SOPA. On one hand, I see the reasoning behind this, especially after the anti-GoDaddy campaign resulted in so many domains being transferred. But the GoDaddy thing directly affected a party that was going to benefit from SOPA. Here, most people who will be inconvenienced will be consumers like you or me. Legislators definitely use Twitter and Google, so the blackout will affect them as well, but damn will this have far-reaching effects. (Also, why isn’t Tumblr on the list? This site had some pretty strong anti-SOPA programs last month.)
This right here is why SOPA is bad. Separately, I dislike both of these works (Star Trek and Ke$ha songs), but put them together, and they become amazing! If we’re not free to make stuff like this, how will I ever be exposed to stupid dance music and clips from cheesy science fiction shows!
I know this isn’t how SOPA works, but wouldn’t it be kinda great if Congress had to shut itself down for violating the bill? It’s not like anything gets done when they are in session (except potentially SOPA getting passed).
As the debates on SOPA continue, opponents are getting more frustrated with the likely-to-pass legislation. On Thursday, the House conducted a debate on the bill which lasted roughly half a day (and at one point degenerated into an embarrassingly childish fight over a statement made on Twitter and the propriety of using certain words in the Congressional record). As it turns out, many members of the House freely admitted to not understanding how the internet works.
As the article heading this post argues, this is unacceptable. If Congress doesn’t understand something it plans on legislating, it is supposed to conduct hearings and studies to educate its members so that they can write informed, effective legislation. For whatever reason, they have chosen not to do so here, which probably helps explain why SOPA is so destructive.
This explains a little more about SOPA, including arguing that it will have little to no effect on the actual pirates it purports to target, and provides a link to the bill itself.
Finding an article talking about the positives of SOPA was not easy. I barely count this as a positive article, because it goes into the negatives just as much as the positives.
I think looking for pro-SOPA support on the internet is pretty much a fool’s errand, seeing as how the law will make make sharing on the internet much harder. Google, LinkedIn, Facebook, and Tumblr all oppose this new law, and from what I’ve read of it, I’m not a big fan either. Then again, all of my research has been on the internet, so my sources are biased.
