RIAA Gets To Move Forward In Case That Tries To Force ISPs To Help Copyright Trolls

10 04 2018

TechDirt

Mike Masnick

Back in February, we wrote about the details of the appeals court ruling in BMG v. Cox, a case that looked at whether or not internet access providers are required to terminate users accused of repeat infringement. The case was really a proxy for copyright trolling operation Rightscorp, which floods ISPs with claims of infringement tied to “settlement” offers that it wants the ISPs to pass on to end users. As discovery during the Cox case revealed, Rightscorp engages in incredibly sketchy practices to pressure people into paying up (such as telling them that they need to take their computers to the local police station for a search to prove they’re not infringing).

However, due to a bunch of weird details in that case — including a judge who made it clear he didn’t think the internet was such a big deal — Cox lost that case, and then again on appeal. The good thing in the appeal, however, was that the opinion mostly limited its decision to the specific facts in Cox’s case, which included the fact that it had a “repeat infringer policy” but it didn’t follow its own policy. That’s really what sunk Cox. The court noted that an ISP should have wide latitude in designing its own repeat infringer policy, it just had to then follow its own policy. And Cox didn’t.

While that case was going on, a second similar case was filed, this time by Universal Music Group against Grande Communications. Back in February, the magistrate judge on that case made recommendations to allow the case to move forward, though throwing out some of the claims. As TorrentFreak recently pointed out, the Title III judge in the case has accepted the recommendations of the magistrate, which you can see here.

more

The content in this post was found at https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180405/17093439579/riaa-gets-to-move-forward-case-that-tries-to-force-isps-to-help-copyright-trolls.shtml Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post. and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com.

Powered by WPeMatico



Guest Post: Virtual Reality as an Agent of Legal Change

10 04 2018

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law

Guest post by Gilad Yadin

april 9, 2018

When I began studying the legal implications of virtual reality technology, seeing or using an actual virtual reality system required access to a research laboratory or a specialized training facility; virtual reality was something most people associated with science fiction, it seemed futuristic and far-fetched. A few years ago, Facebook got very publicly into virtual reality and suddenly everyone was talking about affordable, connected, social virtual reality environments. These days, roughly $400 worth of virtual reality hardware allows anyone to interact with social contacts, through expressive avatars, in a three-dimensional spatial environment. The surging virtual reality market is estimated to reach $40 billion by 2020. Cyberspace is changing in ways that can no longer be ignored.

more

The content in this post was found at 

http://www.jetlaw.org/2018/04/09/guest-post-guest-post-virtual-reality-as-an-agent-of-legal-change/

Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post. and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com.

Powered by WPeMatico



DSM Watch: Regulation on Portability of Online Content comes into force 1 April 2018

4 04 2018

Hogan/Lovells

APRIL 1ST, 2018 BY DR. NILS RAUER, ALASTAIR SHAW AND PENNY THORNTON

This year’s Easter holiday brings with it a further milestone in the Commission’s endeavor to bring about a truly Digital Single Market: The Portability Regulation (EU) 2017/1128 comes into force on 1 April 2018. The Regulation facilitates cross-border portability of online content. It allows for subscribed content services to “travel” with the subscriber throughout the entire European Union. Be it movies, sport events, music, e-books, online games, they all need to remain accessible when temporarily abroad in another Member State. Service providers need to make sure this travel option is provided to their customers. Importantly, the Regulation applies to both new and existing subscriber contracts.

 

….

The Regulation

According to Article 3 of the Regulation, providers of paid-for online content services are obliged to allow access and use of the content during a temporary presence in another Member State. The same content, the same types and the same number of devices (PC, smartphone, tablet etc.), the same number of authorised users and the same range of functions must be granted. Only the quality standards abroad are not guaranteed to be equal to those in the country of subscription. Providers who operate on the basis of a contract but free of charge can choose whether they want to make their online content available to their subscribers while travelling (Article 6). This also includes public broadcasters to which a mandatory broadcasting fee has to be paid.

more

The content in this post was found at https://www.hlmediacomms.com/2018/04/01/6952/

Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post. and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com.

Powered by WPeMatico



Intellectual Property in the World of eSports

4 04 2018

IP Watchdog

Roman Brtka
April 2, 2018

eSports is an exciting new area — not only in the sporting industry but in legal terms. There are various key players such as eGamers, game publishers, and organizers of eSports events, who are facing the challenge of sufficiently protecting their rights. Organizers need to ensure that they obtain all necessary usage rights from the game publishers and the participating eGamers, and these parties need to be aware of their possible ancillary copyrights and should take appropriate precautionary measures to protect them.

more

The content in this post was found at https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2018/04/02/intellectual-property-esports/id=95245/

Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post. and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com.

Powered by WPeMatico



How Do Musical Artists Get Paid When Skaters Use Their Songs at the Olympics?

4 04 2018

IP Watchdog

Franco Galbo
March 29, 2018

The somewhat jarring Olympics tradition of juxtaposing athleticism and grace with instrumental versions of popular songs you might hear in the grocery store came to an end in Pyeongchang. After the Sochi games in 2014, the International Skating Union (ISU) decided to shake things up (or shake it off, Taylor Swift?) and began allowing skating to music with lyrics. This is not at all surprising given the demographics of the skaters, who are much more likely to enjoy “Single Ladies” than “Clair de Lune.” Pleasing Generation Z and millennial skaters, however, was not the main goal of the rule change; rather, the ISU wanted to appeal to younger audiences who tune in to watch the Olympics and other major figure skating events.

more

The content in this post was found at https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2018/03/29/musical-artists-get-paid-when-skaters-use-their-songs-olympics/id=95117/

Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post. and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com.

Powered by WPeMatico



2H 2017 & Q1 2018 Quick Links, Part 1: Copyright, Trademarks, Keyword Ads

4 04 2018

Copyright

* The Executive Corp. v. Oisoon, LLC, 2017 WL 4310113 (M.D. Tenn. Sept. 28, 2017). A default judgment:

* The Leader’s Institute v. Jackson, 3:14-CV-3572-B  (N.D. Tex. Nov. 22, 2017): “

* Julia Reda:

* Chicago Tribune: Halloween is here with a copyright lawsuit over banana costumes

* Law 360: Cheerleader Uniform IP Case Ends With Unusual Settlement

* Quartz: With no more income from album sales, a 69-year-old rock legend has to go back on tour

* Billboard: Inside the Secretive, Difficult Struggle Between Artists & Labels Over Album Copyrights

* Recode: “Inside Oracle’s cloak-and-dagger political war with Google”

* Techdirt: ‘Six Strikes’ May Be Dead, But ISPs Keep Threatening To Disconnect Accused Pirates Anyway

* NY Times: HuffPost, Breaking From Its Roots, Ends Unpaid Contributions

* Artsy: Copying Other People’s Art Can Boost Creativity, Study Finds

* Washington Post: Meet the sometime-streamer: TV watchers who sign up for one show — then cancel

* WSJ: Millennials Unearth an Amazing Hack to Get Free TV: the Antenna

Trademark and Publicity Rights

* Fischer v. Forrest, 2018 WL 948758 (SDNY Feb. 16, 2018):

* Blue Water International, Inc. v. Hattrick’s Irish Sports Pub LLC, 2017 WL 4182405 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 21, 2017)

* Slate: Let’s Uber. I’ll Call a Lyft. Why conscientious consumers no longer want to use Uber, except as a verb.

* The Economist: A firm that shares a name with its founder earns higher profits.

* NY Times: Who Is Really Making ‘Chihuly Art’? Bonus: photos from my visit to the Chihuly Museum in Seattle.

* Roe v. Amazon. Sixth Circuit upholds dismissal of Gronking to Remember book cover photograph case. Prior blog post.

Keyword Ads

* Altinex Inc. v. Alibaba.com Hong Kong Ltd:

* Wendy Davis: “Contact Lens Seller Agrees To $7 Million Settlement Over Search Ads”

* SearchInsider: Most Expensive Keywords In The U.S.

* Search Engine Land: Google drops support for meta news keywords tag

more

The content in this post was found at https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2018/04/2h-2017-q1-2018-quick-links-part-1-copyright-trademarks-keyword-ads.htm

Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post. and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com.

Powered by WPeMatico



Researchers’ Challenge to CFAA Moves Forward–Sandvig v. Sessions

4 04 2018

This is a lawsuit brought by four professors and a media organization (First Look, publisher of the Intercept). Plaintiffs study real estate, finance, and employment transactions and seek to highlight the discriminatory effects of algorithms. To do so, they create fake profiles, including profiles for minorities, and test the profiles. The court describes this as akin to testing for discrimination in the housing or loan markets. For example, plaintiffs intend to use bots to create fake profiles which then will surf real estate websites, simulating the behavior of minority groups. The plaintiffs intend to then scrape the websites to record the displayed properties. Similarly, several of the other plaintiffs intend to use bots to crawl job-seeker profiles, then create fake employer profiles so they can search for candidates and see how they are ranked. They also intend to create fake job-seeker profiles and have these fictitious job-seekers apply for fictitious jobs, to see how algorithms rank candidates. Both the professors and First Look intend to publicize their findings.

They all contend their actions leave them susceptible to the risk of prosecution under the CFAA. They brought an action for declaratory relief alleging First Amendment and Due Process Claims.

. . .

Standing: In the pre-enforcement context, a plaintiff has to establish that she has an intention to engage in conduct (1) that is affected with a constitutional interest; (2) that is proscribed by statute and (3) which gives risk a credible risk of prosecution.

The court says plaintiffs’ activity has a constitutional dimension, among other things, because:

scraping plausibly falls within the ambit of the First Amendment.

The court says cases broadly recognize the right to record “matters of public interest.” Scraping, at least as it encompasses information located in a “public forum,” falls within this right. The court says plaintiffs also have an interest in making “harmless misrepresentations” to websites.

Case citation: Sandvig v. Sessions, 2018 WL 1568881 (D.D.C. March 30, 2018)

more

The content in this post was found at https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2018/04/researchers-challenge-to-cfaa-moves-forward-sandvig-v-sessions.htm

Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post. and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com.

 

Powered by WPeMatico



Big Loss for News Media in Copyright Case: Where Is Your Server, and Why Do I Care?

27 03 2018

Pay or Play: Entertainment Law

on March 22, 2018

The digitization of content is forcing courts to take a fresh look at basic copyright concepts. The Disney v. Redbox case that I’ve recently blogged on addressed whether a digital download code is a “copy” of a work. Now a New York District Court has taken up the meaning of “display” in a case that could have big consequences for the way news outlets do business.

A photographer named Justin Goldman snapped a candid photo of New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady with Boston Celtics general manager Danny Ainge. Goldman posted the photo on Snapchat, whence it went viral, including on Twitter. The defendant news outlets, including Breitbart, Time and the Boston Globe, embedded the tweets together with the photo in stories concerning whether Brady was assisting the Celtics to recruit a player named Kevin Durant. Goldman sued for copyright infringement. The defendants moved for summary judgment on the ground that they had merely linked to an image hosted on Twitter’s servers and did not themselves maintain copies.

Judge Katherine Forrest rejected this position. In her view, the location of the server on which an image is stored is merely a technical distinction that is not relevant to whether the copyright owner’s display right was infringed. Judge Forrest acknowledged that this view is contrary to the position of the 9th Circuit, but held that it is supported by Supreme Court precedent and the language and legislative history of the Copyright Act.

more

The content in this post was found at https://payorplay.foxrothschild.com/2018/03/articles/general-entertainment-law-news-updates/big-loss-for-news-media-in-copyright-case-where-is-your-server-and-why-do-i-care/

Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post. and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com.

Powered by WPeMatico



BlackBerry Sues Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp for Willful Infringement of Mobile Communications Patents

27 03 2018

IP Watchdog

Steve Brachmann
March 24, 2018

Canadian intellectual property owner BlackBerry Limited filed a suit alleging patent infringement claims against Menlo Park, CA-based social media giant Facebook Inc. in the Central District of California. BlackBerry alleges that Facebook, along with its subsidiaries WhatsApp and Instagram, violate patents held by BlackBerry in the field of mobile messaging communications.

more

The content in this post was found at https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2018/03/24/blackberry-sues-facebook-instagram-whatsapp-patent-infringement/id=94984/

Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post. and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com.

Powered by WPeMatico



Nine Lives Indeed: Grumpy Cat Wins IP Lawsuit Against Beverage Company

27 03 2018

Adlaw by Request

Andrew Levad and Jason Gordon on 26 March 2018

… “Grumpy Cat,” real name Tardar Sauce, …. owners Tabatha and Bryan Bundesen founded Grumpy Cat Ltd., which owns various IP rights associated with the Grumpy Cat brand.

In late 2015, Grumpy Cat Ltd. filed suit against beverage company Grenade Beverages LLC and its owners Paul and Nick Sandford for trademark and copyright infringement. Grumpy Cat Ltd. entered into a license agreement with Grenade in 2013 allowing the company to market a line of iced coffee beverages, which was later allegedly breached when Grenade began marketing additional products featuring Grumpy Cat’s brand.  Two years of litigation later, in January 2018,

more

The content in this post was found at https://www.adlawbyrequest.com/2018/03/articles/in-the-courts/nine-lives-indeed-grumpy-cat-wins-ip-lawsuit-against-beverage-company

Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post. and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com.

Powered by WPeMatico