Digital Copyright Intro to IP – Prof. Merges 3.9.09.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Intellectual Property Image: William J. Wynn.
Advertisements

Maximizing Online Opportunities for Audience Engagement, Advertiser Value and Profitability NASHVILLE 2010.
Copyrights for Creatives April 16, 2014 Brocach Irish Pub.
Copyright and related rights in the EU: rental and lending, satellite and cable and term directives Turin, October 2011 Dr E. Derclaye University of Nottingham.
Copyright & PR Presented by John MacPhail Partner.
“NEEDLETIME” WHO, WHAT, HOW AND WHEN?. COPYRIGHT AND PERFORMERS’ PROTECTION ACTS ENABLING LEGISLATION PASSED IN 2002 COLLECTIVE ADMINISTRATION SUBJECT.
Copyright Law Boston College Law School March 11, 2003 Rights - Public Performance, Display.
 Web 2.0: Music Services April 27, Agenda  Cloud services  Online streaming services  Questions and app sharing by demand.
Telstra v APRA Implications for Internet Service Providers WASCAL/IPSANZ Joint Seminar Paper Presented by Jeremy Malcolm 21 October 1997.
Slides prepared by Cyndi Chie and Sarah Frye1 A Gift of Fire Third edition Sara Baase Chapter 4: Intellectual Property.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School February 4, 2009 Copyright – Indirect, Digital Issues.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School February 1, 2008 Copyright – Digital Issues.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School February 1, 2007 Copyright – Digital Issues.
Digital Copyright Intro to IP – Prof. Merges
Copyright Law Boston College Law School March 13, 2003 Rights - Digital Rights.
1 Issues in Digital Audio. 2 Intellectual Property  Non-tangible property that is the result of creativity:  Patents – products, processes etc.  Copyright.
COPYRIGHT LAW: THE CASE OF THE MUSIC INDUSTRY Professor Fischer The Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law March 24, 2003.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School January 28, 2008 Copyright – Rights – Fair Use.
HSC: All My Own Work Copyright.
Digital Copyright II Intro to IP – Prof. Merges
Copyright Law Boston College Law School February 25, 2003 Rights - Reproduction, Adaptation.
Copyright Law Boston College Law School March 4, 2003 Rights – Public Distribution & Performance.
Copyright and Podcasting: The Impact of Regulation on New Communication Technologies Edward L. Carter, J.D. Scott Lunt, M.A. candidate Brigham Young University.
UFCEXR-20-1Multimedia Sound Production Multimedia Sound Production and Copyright.
Infringement II: Derivative Works and Other Rights Prof Merges – Intro to IP
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School January 26, 2007 Copyright – Rights – Fair Use.
There are two copyrights in any recorded piece of music: 1)The copyright in the musical work (notes and lyrics); and 2)The copyright in the sound recording.
C opyright Toni Lumley Music. Song Copyrights Copyrights identify who actually owns the rights to a song thus who gets to make money from it. When songwriters.
Class 19 Copyright, Spring, 2008 Consumer Control Randal C. Picker Leffmann Professor of Commercial Law The Law School The University of Chicago
EXtension National Videoconference January 17, : p.m. EST.
Copyright Licenses at VUW Copyright ©2004 Stephen Marshall distributed under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License (
WIPO Copyright Sector 1.  Fundamental or constitutional rights or public interest: freedom of speech, access to information, right for education, enjoyment.
Copyright and Fair Use Online Presenter: David Wittenstein ©2007 Dow Lohnes PLLC Jon Hart David Wittenstein
The Recording Industry Week 4. THE RISE OF RECORDS As late as 1880 or 1890, people growing up in a middle-class U.S. household had no recorded music in.
Digital Copyright Intro to IP – Prof. Merges
COPYRIGHT LAW 2006 Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America Prof. Fischer April 18, 2006.
Copyright Law Copyright ©2004 Stephen Marshall distributed under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License (
MAKING AVAILABLE RIGHT AS PROVIDED BY RUSSIAN CIVIL LAW State educational institution of higher professional education “Russian academy of justice” Ilya.
COPYRIGHT LAW 2006 Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America Prof. Fischer April 20, 2006.
The law on Intermediary Liability in India
Who owns the Bits? Digital copyright issues are continually evolving. IP address do not map to a single person – hard to trace user Music and movie industry.
1 Wizards of OS 3 The Future of the Digital Commons Berlin - June 10 to 12, 2004 International Copyright in the Digital Era Geidy Lung WIPO Copyright Law.
Webcasting Royalties: Where do we go from here? Matthew J. Astle Attorney, Wiley Rein LLP.
IFRRO World Congress 2012 Visual Working Group Copyright Agency | Viscopy Services Agreement Jim Alexander, Chief Executive, Copyright Agency | Viscopy.
Chapter 17-Content and Talent. Overview Introduction to content. Rights required for using content. Using content. Using talent.
Digital Copyright II Intro to IP – Prof. Merges [Originally scheduled for ]
Copyrights on the internet vincent yee. Digital Millennium Copyright Act October 28, 1998, President Clinton signed the Act into law.
Digital Audio. Analog versus Digital Analog Sound waves “similar” or “copy” Electrical impedance creates noise Digital Sound encoded in binary form Sampled.
COPYRIGHT LAW 2008 Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America Prof. Fischer Class 27: November 19, 2008.
October 2010 Music Publishing Overview. 2 Overview of Music Publishing Music Publishing is the business of acquiring, administering and exploiting rights.
HSC: All My Own Work What is copyright and what does it protect? How does it relate to me?
Christopher Doval, Esq. Don Anque, J.D. Maesea McCalpin B.A.
STANDARD COPYRIGHT RULES AND RELATED TERMS MyGraphicsLab Adobe Premiere Pro CS6 ACA Certification Preparation for Video Communication Copyright © 2013.
Licensing. Some Nuggets... US IP value = $5.5 trillion or more $180 billion in revenue annually – $2.8B in 1970; $27B in 1990 US IP exports = more than.
Media Industry Structure: Oligopoly The “few” selling to the many: Dominant firm oligopoly: One firm holds 50-90% of the market Tight oligopoly: Four firms.
COPYRIGHT LAW 2004 Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America Prof. Fischer April 5, 2004.
Slides prepared by Cyndi Chie and Sarah Frye1 A Gift of Fire Third edition Sara Baase Chapter 4: Intellectual Property.
Creative Commons terms and definitions By Chelsey Maton.
Johnny FIANDEIRO BSc Eng (Elec) LLB Afrika/Nuus/Oos-Randse-inwoners-vas-oor- dwelm-fabriek IP ASPECTS OF LOCAL.
STANDARD COPYRIGHT RULES AND RELATED TERMS ACA Certification Preparation for Video Communication.
Korean Association of Phonogram Producers November 2007.
INTERNET RADIO Stuck between a broadcast and a jukebox.
International Intellectual Property Prof. Manheim Spring, 2007 Exclusive Rights & Exceptions Copyright © 2007.
Library Archiving and Internet Service Provider Status Shirley A. Mason Library Media Specialist 12 July 2008.
Part 2: Songwriting, Publishing, Copyright, and Licensing.
Music Licensing 101 Webinar June 28, 2017 Click HERE for audio
Lecture 28 Intellectual Property(Cont’d)
Who owns the Bits? Digital copyright issues are continually evolving.
Media Industry Structure: Oligopoly
Who owns the Bits? Digital copyright issues are continually evolving.
Presentation transcript:

Digital Copyright Intro to IP – Prof. Merges

Agenda Review coevolution of Digital technology and copyright law – Legislation vs. litigation Grokster case study Kelly and Amazon: fair use and digital distribution

Coevolution of digital tech and copyright law Digital Audio Tape legislation, 1995 A model accommodation of IP and new technology?

“Media Taxes” Surcharge on technology and media Distribute pool of proceeds to artists/creators in some way

Terry Fisher – “Promises to Keep”

Music compulsory license Lessig proposes an internet-wide compulsory license for downloading of music Separate compensation from control

Larry Lessig and Terry Fisher Compulsory license, paid for via a tax on all content Is there a better way? I think so …

This form of property is a wrong turn, I would argue Merges, “Contracting into Liability Rules: Intellectual Property Rights and Collective Rights Organizations,” 84 CLR 1293 (1996)

Compulsory license vs. private negotiations Difficulty of bargaining “in the shadow of” imminent legislative intervention Webcasting: Case Study

Sec Exclusive Rights in Copyrighted Works (6) in the case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission.

(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 114: 3 main categories “Exempt” transmissions: digital broadcasts by established broadcasters Non-exempt transmissions: compulsory license for non-interactive subscription services Interactive services (not really broadcasting): requires license from sound recording copyright owner

Sec. 114 (d) Limitations on Exclusive Right. — Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106(6) — (1) Exempt transmissions and retransmissions. — The performance of a sound recording publicly by means of a digital audio transmission, other than as a part of an interactive service, is not an infringement of section 106(6) if the performance is part of —

Sec. 114 (cont’d) (A) a nonsubscription broadcast transmission; (B) a retransmission of a nonsubscription broadcast transmission: Provided, That, [the retransmission is basically by analog broadcast repeater, and not over the internet]

[114(d)](2) Statutory Licensing of Certain Transmissions. — The performance of a sound recording publicly by means of a subscription digital audio transmission not exempt under paragraph (1), an eligible nonsubscription transmission, or a transmission not exempt under paragraph (1) that is made by a preexisting satellite digital audio radio service shall be subject to statutory licensing, in accordance with subsection (f) if — (A)(i) the transmission is not part of an interactive service;

(3) Licenses for transmissions by interactive services. — … (C) Notwithstanding the grant of an exclusive or nonexclusive license of the right of public performance under section 106(6), an interactive service may not publicly perform a sound recording unless a license has been granted for the public performance of any copyrighted musical work contained in the sound recording: Provided, That such license to publicly perform the copyrighted musical work may be granted either by a performing rights society representing the copyright owner or by the copyright owner.

Agreement reached on Internet music royalty rates By RACHEL METZ AP Technology Writer Feb 17, 2:12 PM EST NEW YORK (AP) -- A group that collects royalties for music artists and recording companies has agreed to reduce rates for thousands of commercial radio stations that also play songs over the Internet. Internet radio station operators had complained that rates originally set by the federal Copyright Royalty Board in 2007 could essentially force them to shut down. The new deal lowers those rates by about 16 percent in 2009 and The stations will now pay $1.50 for every song heard by a thousand listeners in 2009, rising to $2.50 per 1,000 listeners in The agreement between the National Association of Broadcasters and the royalty-collection group SoundExchange covers the Internet streaming operations at several thousand NAB- member stations, including those owned by Clear Channel Communications Inc. and CBS Corp. Stations that are not members of the broadcasters' group have the option of joining the agreement, according to the NAB. ION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

09/02/internet-radio-soundexchange- talks-fail.html The Digital Media Association confirmed that negotiations with SoundExchange over net radio royalties did not yield an agreement before the February 15 deadline. The DiMA, on behalf of its members which include RealNetworks, Pandora and MTV has been negotiating with SoundExchange since March of 2007 when the Copyright Royalty Board increased some webcasters royalties by 300%.

Grokster Specific facts Holding

Facts What did the evidence show about the intent of Grokster’s founders and principals? Note how other distribution schemes may differ...

Holding p. 602 “one who infringes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe”

U.S. universities are getting a glimpse at a plan that would build a small music- royalty fee into the tuition payments they receive from students. If successful, the model — proposed by digital music strategist Jim Griffin on behalf of Warner Music Group — could be expanded to make ISPs the collector of such micropayments …

Liability and product design: Menell Legal Realism in Action: Indirect Copyright Liability's Continuing Tort Framework and Sony's De Facto Demise (with D. Nimmer), 55 UCLA L. Rev. 143 (2007) Unwinding Sony, 95 Cal L Rev 941 (2007)

Perfect 10 v. Amazon Facts Holdings

PP Although an image may have been created originally to serve an entertainment, aesthetic, or informative function, a search engine transforms the image into a pointer directing a user to a source of information. Just as a “parody has an obvious claim to transformative value” because “it can provide social benefit, by shedding light on an earlier work, and, in the process, creating a new one,”Campbell, 510 U.S. at 579, 114 S.Ct. 1164, a search engine provides social benefit by incorporating an original work into a new work, namely, an electronic reference tool.