Have any suggestions for the 3 Count? Let me know via Twitter @plagiarismtoday.
First off today, Catherine Shu at TechCrunch reports that YouTube has confirmed that it has renewed its deal with music video distributor VEVO. The deal not only means VEVO content, including official music videos, will continue to appear on YouTube but that YouTube will also be taking a 7 percent stake in its video counterpart.
It had been rumored that VEVO was looking to sign a deal with Facebook and possibly remove its content, which includes many of YouTube’s most popular videos, off of the site. This deal heads off of that and ensures VEVO content will remain on the site. This was especially important for YouTube as VEVO is also YouTube’s top channel partner with over 50 million unique views.
The deal has been valued between $40 million and $50 million.
Next up today, Andy at Torrentfreak writes that Germany has passed a new copyright law aimed at reducing the amount that copyright holders can demand on settlements. The goal is to target so-called copyright “trolls” who sue alleged pirates en masse to procure quick settlements.
The law sets strict guidelines on what can be demanded in a cease and desist letter by a copyright holder, reducing the damages that can be demanded to about 1,000 Euros ($1,300), which includes both a small amount of damages and legal fees.
Companies that violate these rules will not be able to collect legal fees from alleged infringers and, in fact, will have to pay the legal fees of those they threaten. However, it only covers one instance per rightholder, meaning future infringements of the same rightsholder’s work will be more expensive for a file sharer.
Finally today, Philippa Warr at Wired UK reports that a study by the UK Intellectual Property Office took a look at orphan works laws throughout the world and found that the standards were inconsistent and did little to address the issue in many cases.
Among the challenges were inconsistent pricing for clearing works, problem with licensing orphaned broadcasts, and a lack of a definition as to what constitutes a “diligent search” when looking for an original author.
Orphan works laws are designed to let others use copyrighted works who have been “orphaned”, meaning that their creator or rightsholder can no longer be located. However, according to the report, the problems with orphan works laws make mass digitization efforts too expensive, even for non-profit organizations.
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.