3 Count: OK Fingerprints

Jonathan BaileyAugust 23, 2011

2 minutes read

Have any suggestions for the 3 Count? Let me know via Twitter @plagiarismtoday.

1: Amazon, Dropbox, Google and You Win in Cloud-Music Copyright Decision

First off today, music locker service MP3Tunes, though found liable for not complying with DMCA notices, has been handed a major win by a District Court and may be paving the way for Amazon, Google and others to launch more efficient cloud music services. In the ruling, the judge gave his approval on both the fingerprinting of audio tracks, which means that MP3Tunes needs only store one copy of a previously uploaded file, and the sideloading of audio tracks, meaning that users can load tracks from elsewhere on the Web. The ruling is a boost for Dropbox, which uses the same fingerprinting technology to save on file space and bandwidth, as well as other music locker services, such as Amazon and Google, that may want to use these features. However, EMI and the other publishers involved in the suit likely plan to appeal the ruling.

2: Oracle Wants Copyright Claims to Remain in Google Suit

Next up today, in its lawsuit against Google over the company’s use of JAVA in the Android operating system, Oracle has filed a objection to keep a copyright element of the suit intact. Google had previously sought dismissal of some of Oracle’s claims stating that API elements were not copyrightable. However, Oracle, in its objection, has asked for that to be resolved at trial saying that no court has ruled as such and that Google requires its partners to respect copyright in its own APIs. Google will have a chance to respond to the objection.

3: It’s Not Over Yet, Jammie Thomas: RIAA Appeals Damage Reduction

Finally today, in a widely expected move, the RIAA has appealed the most recent ruling in its case against alleged file sharer Jammie Thomas-Rasset. The lower court last month reduced the damages she would be ordered to pay from from $1.5 million to $54,000 however, the RIAA is specifically appealing whether Thomas-Rasset’s alleged sharing is “distribution” under the copyright act, which the lower court ruled it was not. This could set the stage for a third trial in the case, likely on the issue of damages alone (for the second time).

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.