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

1: Judge Rules “Locker” Site is Not Direct Copyright Infringer

First off today, in the lawsuit between the movie studios and the file locker service Hotfile, Hotfile has scored the first victory getting the judge to drop the studios’ charge of direct copyright infringement. However, the judge is allowing the case to go forward on the issue of secondary liability for Hotfile’s alleged hosting of infringing materials. The win is of potentially huge importance for Hotfile as direct infringement is not protected under DMCA safe harbors. However, there are still questions as to whether Hotfile qualifies for such protections due to their reward system that pays users for uploading popular files.

2: Study: Fair Use Drives Large Part of US Economy

Next up today, a report commissioned by the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) found that some 17 percent of the U.S. GDP is made from fair use, totaling $4.5 trillion in revenue in 2009, up from $3.4 trillion in 2002. The study, which was meant to show the importance of fair use exemptions, went on to warn against legislation such as PROTECT IP which, according to Colorado Democrat Jared Polis, could weaken the Internet and threaten this revenue.

3: Announcing the Winner of the Public Knowledge “Copyright School” Video Challenge!

Finally today, Public Knowledge announced its winner in its $1,000 contest to create a video in response to YouTube’s controversial “Copyright School” short. The video, which touts fair use and counter-notices aims to be the “rest” of the copyright story. YouTube’s Copyright School video, which is required viewing for members who have been the subject of takedowns, drew criticism for only briefly mentioning fair use and ignoring remixes and mashups.

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.

Want the Full Story?

Tune in every Wednesday evening at 6 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.

The 3 Count Logo was created by Justin Goff and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License.

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

1: France’s Official P2P Monitoring Firm Hacked

First off today, a firm that collects IP addresses for France’s “Three Strikes” law has been hacked and has apparently leaked IP addresses of suspected file sharers. The firm, Trident Media Guard, claims that the danger from the leak is minimal as no personal information was shared and the server affected was a “test” server. However, Hadopi, the French government agency in charge of overseeing the law, has announced that it has suspended its reliance on the company pending an investigation. The leak may have also released information on Trident’s operations, including IP addresses used for monitoring.

2: Hargreaves Review Gives Copyright Law Digital Makeover

Next up today, the report by professor Hargreaves has been made public and it has proposed a range of changes to UK copyright law including the implementation of a U.S.-style fair use provision, the legalization of private format shifting, the creation of a central agency to oversee and collect royalties for orphan works and a similar government body to facilitate the licensing of music and movies. While none of the elements are a surprise, especially considering the details were leaked earlier this week, it is widely anticipated that the UK government, which requested the report, will seriously consider the proposals and bring forward legislation to implement them.

Update 5/20 – It appears there was some initial confusion about the report as it does NOT include fair use recommendations.

3: Righthaven Hit with Class-Action Counterclaim

Finally today, Righthaven, the company that has purchased the rights to sue for infringement of content from the Las Vegas Reivew-Journal and the Denver Post has been hit with a class action counterclaim that could draw as many as 57 plaintiffs. Buzzfeed, a site previously sued by Righthaven, is claiming that the company misuses copyright law and the litigation process to extort money from defendants unfairly. The lawsuit mentions all 275 of Righthaven’s lawsuits but only applies to the 57 filed in Colorado. Buzzfeed also denied that it had committed copyright infringement and defended itself against Righthaven’s lawsuit against them.

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.

Want the Full Story?

Tune in every Wednesday evening at 6 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.

The 3 Count Logo was created by Justin Goff and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License.

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

1: Google Busted for Copyright Violation in Belgium

First off today, Google has lost yet another round in Belgium, with an Appeals Court ruling that Google is violating Belgian copyright law by linking to and displaying excerpts from French and German-language newspapers in the country. The court has ordered Google to remove all such links or face a fine of 25,000 euros (about $35,000) per day it does not comply. This follows a similar pair of defeats in 2007, which forced Google to remove several papers from its index. Those papers were eventually readded. Google, in a statement, said they believe Google News is in full compliance with Belgian copyright law and that they are doing nothing wrong.

2: Radical Copyright Law Reform to Boost Ireland’s Digital Economy?

Next up today, Ireland is considering a “radical” copyright reform that would bring a U.S.-style fair use clause to the country for both commercial and non-commercial use. The country’s Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Richard Bruton, has initiated a review to determine the feasibility of implementing such a system in Ireland. As part of that review, the government is seeking feedback from the public between now and June 30.

3: Library of Congress Builds the Record Collection of the Century

Finally today, the Library of Congress is expected to unveil a plan tomorrow to allow the public greater access to its library of more than six million works. The LoC is preparing to increase public access to its Mt. Pony, VA warehouse, which is over 45 acres in size, by allowing anyone on site to listen to any track possible while they are on site. The the LoC has said it would like to grant greater access to works online, it acknowledges copyright law prohibits that, especially since pre-1972 sound recordings are not under Federal jurisdiction.

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.

Want the Full Story?

Tune in every Wednesday evening at 6 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.

The 3 Count Logo was created by Justin Goff and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License.

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

1: Copyright Troll Righthaven’s Epic Blunder: A Lawsuit Targeting Ars

First off today, Righthaven filed suit against freelance writer Eriq Gardner over a column he wrote for the site Ars Technica. The article in question was about a previous Righthaven lawsuit, that one against The Drudge Report, in which Ars ran a photo taken from Righthaven’s filings in the case, which happened to depict a grainy version of the Denver Post photo the original lawsuit was over. Righthaven, which represents both the Las Vegas Review-Journal and the Denver Post, announced they had dropped the suit against Gardner with prejudice after realizing their error, but the blunder called into further question Righthaven’s litigation tactics, which involve suing sites and their owners over using content from various newspapers without first filing any form of warning.

2: In Bow to Authors, Baidu Scrubs Document Sharing Site

Next up today, bowing to pressure from local authors, Chinese search engine Baidu has scrubbed nearly 3 million documents from its document sharing service, Wenku, and has said that it will shut down the service if problems continue. Baidu also said that it is seeking a new round of negotiations with authors and other copyright holders regarding the document service and is hoping to reach a mutually-beneficially agreement. Though Baidu has said it can’t be certainly 100% of the infringing material is gone, it does hope that the mass deletion shows their good faith and will help bring authors to the negotiating table.

3: EMI Wins $950,000 in Copyright Infringement Lawsuit over Beatles Songs

Finally today, the BlueBeat.com case has been settled and EMI can expect to get nearly $1 million from Media Rights Technologies, the former owners of the site. BlueBeat was selling Beatles tracks for 25 cents without a license from EMI, who hold the rights to the songs, and, when pressed in court, claimed that they were not selling the original tracks but instead were offering ones created by ”psycho-acoustic simulation”. The judge, however, disagreed with that and found the company liable for infringement, prompting this settlement.

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.

Want the Full Story?

Tune in every Wednesday evening at 6 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.

The 3 Count Logo was created by Justin Goff and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License.

This issue is made even more complicated by the presence of an unofficial “fifth” fair use factor. An element weighed by judges routinely when deling with fair use cases but found nowhere in the law itself. However, it’s played a critical role in many of the biggest recent fair use cases and likely will continue to play a role in the future.

So what is this factor and how does it affect fair use decisions? To see that we first have to look at the law itself and two judgements where it played a critical.

What the Law Says

On paper, the law is fairly straightforward. There are four factors used to determine whether a use is “fair” and they are:

1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes
2. The nature of the copyrighted work
3. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole
4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work

The first and the fourth factors are generally given the most weight but, after all four factors have been considered, the judge and/or jury will then make a determination as to whether or not the use was fair or not, seeing which side has more weight.

The problem is that many of the factors are subjective, how they are weighted is often subjective and how the eventually conclusion is reached is, much of the time, subjective.

This creates a great deal of room for interpretation and judges have a long history of doing that. This, in turn, opens the door for unofficial factors to creep in and help create judgements that, on their surface, can seem to be conflicting and confusing.

Two Sample Cases

Consider the following two cases, both of which received judgments this week:

1. In Las Vegas, a judge ruled that an Oregon non-profit was within the law to republish an entire article from the Las Vegas Review-Journal because the use was educational, was not used to raise money and the article was primarily factual. The judge also lists several other reasons for his decision, including that Righthaven, the company that filed the suit, is not the original copyright holder and did not offer the defendant the chance to remove the work.
2. Artist Richard Prince, on the other hand, was told that his use of photographs by Patrick Cariou was not a fair use. Even though Prince modified the photos, in some cases minimally and in some cases more significantly, to create what Prince saw as new works. The judge ruled that the modification was not adequate and that the commercial nature of the use forced him to rule it as an infringement.

While both of these rulings make sense (or at least can make sense) in their respective context and there is a great deal that separates them, cases like these frustrate those who want “bright line” fair use rules. Whether it’s “You can’t use a full article.” or “You can use content as long as it’s to make a new expression.” seemingly simple fair use rules don’t apply under the subjective gaze of judges.

To make matters worse, either of these cases could have easily gone very differently either with different judges, different lawyers or slightly different facts.

Much of this is because of the unofficial “fifth factor”, which judges don’t like to talk about but most attorneys and copyright experts acknowledge plays an important role in fair use verdicts.

The Fifth Fair Use Factor

The “fifth factor” of fair use can be summarized simply as “Are you evil?” or, “Does the judge like you?”

Pornography companies, for example, often have a much more difficult time than other artists making fair use arguments. Likewise, large corporations often find it more difficult to deal with fair use issues than individuals simply because of the perception that one is more inherently “evil” than the other.

Though much of this might seem to be rolled up in the first factor, which covers the nature of the use, the fifth actually applies more to the parties themselves and actions they took outside of the alleged infringement rather than the use itself.

This, in turn, seems to have played a big part in the recent Righthaven decision. In that case, the judge raised the fair use issue himself, without prompting from the defendant, and chided Righthaven for using litigation a business model and for its litigation tactics, such as suing before sending any kind of warning or notice.

While these factors aren’t a part of the actual fair use test, they were part of the judge’s argument for ruling against Righthaven.

Similarly, in the Prince case, the judge noted the representatives from Prince had contacted Cariou about purchasing more copies of the book the photos were taken from but did not inquire about getting permission. Once again, permission is not needed to make a fair use argument (the point of fair use being legal reuse without permission) but the judge felt this showed bad faith and listed it as an argument against him.

In short, in both cases the judge weighed the relative “good” and “evil” of both sides and considered that when making a decision.

Dealing with the Fifth Factor

Unfortunately, it can be very difficult to do much to change how the judge feels about you. Much as with other people, some will like and some will hate you, often without cause.

Still, there are a few things you can do to help strengthen your case with this unofficial factor.

1. Operate in Good Faith: Try to get licenses when you can and show a real interest in being fair to copyright holders when using their work. Showing good faith and that you took steps to make your use more “fair” will likely help you in several of the factors, not just the fifth.
2. Follow Standard Protocol: As per the Righthaven case, if you see an infringement, follow standard protocols for warning the alleged infringer and seeking to minimize the damage the infringement does. If anyone could call your actions “troll-like” you’ll probably find judges will favor the other side as much as possible.
3. Don’t Be a Jerk: Name calling, harassment and other unseemly behavior will not win you any friends in the courtroom. Always be civil, even when you disagree.

In short, what it comes down to is this. Fair use gives judges enough flexibility with their verdicts that, if you give them a reason not to like you, they may easily find a reason to rule against you. It may not be right, but it is very much the nature of the beast.

So be reasonable, fair and respectful. If you do that, you may not win them to your side, but at least the judge won’t be against you from the outset either.

Bottom Line

I am loathe to answer questions about fair use for this exact reason. Even with if one knows all of the facts, the case law and the surrounding elements, much of what is and is not a fair use is left up to the whims of the judge or jury.

I used to joke that fair use can hinge on what a judge had for breakfast the morning before writing the verdict. These days, the joke seems to be a lot less funny.

With subjective factors, a fifth factor that exists nowhere in the law and plenty of room for reasonable people to disagree, it is impossible to definitively answer fair use questions until a verdict is handed down. Even then, a conflicting verdict can come down days laster that seems to erase what was said.

Unfortunately though, there is no easy way to fix this. Fair use is so flexible and malleable because it has to be. “Bright Lines” and clear rules will eventually either enable infringement or stifle free speech. Fair use is about balancing those two rights and it’s a complicated, nuanced dance that has to be judged by humans rather than laid down in black and white law.

The current system creates uncertainty and confusion, but that is necessary for the law to function.

Without it, there likely wouldn’t be any fair use protection at all and that, in turn, would be much worse for all involved.

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

1: Righthaven Loses Second Fair Use Ruling Over Copyright Lawsuits

First off today Righthaven, the company filing copyright infringement lawsuits on behalf of the Las Vegas Review-Journal and the Denver Post, has suffered a significant fair use setback as a judge ruled that even copying an entire article could be a fair use. The judge said the verdict was limited on many grounds, namely that Righthaven was not the original copyright holder, had not filed a takedown notice, was suing a non-profit and the article was primarily factual with little creative expression. However, an appeal of this case is almost certain as this ruling could, potentially, completely kill Righthaven’s business model of suing infringers.

2: Richard Prince Loses Fair Use Argument

Next up today, in a completely separate fair use case, artist Richard Prince has lost his case against photographer Patrick Cariou, who had sued him over uses of his photographs. Prince had taken some photos snapped by Cariou, modified them in various ways and then used them in a gallery exhibit. Cariou, who used the images as part of his book “Yes Rasta” sued but Prince claimed his works were a fair use, however, a Federal judge disagreed, granting a summary judgment in the case in favor of Cariou. An appeal is also likely in this case.

3: Filesharing Curbs Face High Court Delays

Finally today, the UK’s two largest ISPs, BT and TalkTalk, will on Wednesday challenge the Digital Economy Act to a judicial review and, on Friday, it will be decided if that review can go forward. According to the ISPs, the act, which aims to stifle file sharing in the country through a “three strikes” regime to cut off access to suspected sharers, both infringes the basic rights of users and did not receive adequate review in Parliament. If it goes through, the review will at least tie up the act’s implementation for over a year.

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.

Want the Full Story?

Tune in every Wednesday evening at 6 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.

The 3 Count Logo was created by Justin Goff and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License.

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

1: AP and Clothing Company Settle Copyright Dispute

First off today, the Associated Press (AP) has settled its legal dispute with Obey Clothing, which had previously sold clothing with the famous Obama “Hope” poster on them. The poster, which was designed by Shepard Fairey, was based on an AP photo, prompting the AP to sue both Fairey and Obey Clothing. Fairey’s case was settled in January and this one was just settled a few weeks before it was due to go to trial. The settlement is similar in many regards, namely that neither side surrenders their view of the law and agree to collaborate in the future over the poster. Financial terms of the settlement were not disclosed.

2: Bon Jovi Says Steve Jobs Is Killing The Music Business

Next up today, according to an interview with the Sunday Times Magazine, rocker Bon Jovi has said he belives Steve Jobs, the co-founder and CEO of Apple, is responsible for “killing” the music industry. According to Jovi digital distribution has killed much of the tactile experience and mystery of buying and listening to music. For this, Jovi bames Jobs and the iTunes store his company helped founded.

3: Google Copyright Purge Leaves Android Developers Exposed

Finally today, one theory regarding the Google’s Android mobile operating system may create a problem for developers and manufacturers alike. According to Edward J. Naughton, much of Android’s code is based on Linux, which is licensed under the GPL. However, Google alters the code through a proprietary means and then re-releases it under the Apache license, which is slightly more restrictive. However, if Google is wrong and its code is still licensed under the GPL, that could mean developers might be forced to reveal the source code of their apps as they are built upon the code as well. This could, feasibly, lead to lawsuits over GPL non-compliance and create challenges for developers and manufacturers alike.

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.

Want the Full Story?

Tune in every Wednesday evening at 6 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.

The 3 Count Logo was created by Justin Goff and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License.

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

1: Movie Studio Tells BitTorrent Users: Turn Yourselves In!

First off today, Corbin Fisher, the gay porn company that has targeted alleged file sharers with litigation, has decided to offer a 14-day amnesty period for file sharers to turn themselves in and settle their cases. However, it isn’t a free amnesty offer, rather, the company is demanding each person seeking amnesty pay $1,000 for their actions, though the money will also get them a 1-year membership to two of the company’s sites. This announcement comes shortly after the company’s parent, Liberty Media, filed suit against Hotfile and some 1,000 of its users for copyright infringement.

2: Better Watch the Paris Hilton Sex Tape on the Internet Now, While it’s Still Free

Next up today, XPays, the company who holds the right in the famous Paris Hilton sex tape, “1 Night in Paris”, has filed a lawsuit against some 843 “Doe” defendants in a Los Angeles Court. The company is claiming the film has been unlawfully distributed via bittorrent and is seeking damages from the defendants, which it hopes to identify via subpoena. The lawsuit also makes the claim that bittorrent makes it possible to distribute pornographic material without age verification, though it doesn’t appear to be part of the lawsuit itself.

3: British Photographer Sued for Jokey Che ‘Growler’ Image

Finally today, in this 3 Count’s only non-porn story, Diana Lopez Korda, the daughter of the late Alberto Korda, who took the iconic “Che Guevara” image, is suing British artist Kate Polyblank claiming that a parody image she created, which replaces Guevara’s face with that of a dog. Polybank’s image, which was based on a photo of a friend’s pet taken by her husband, is part of her “famous faces” series, which, edits of photos of pets to make them look like celebrities. The lawsuit was filed in France, despite none of the parties being French, which will force Polybank to spend up to €12,000 to try and fight the claim.

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.

Want the Full Story?

Tune in every Wednesday evening at 6 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.

The 3 Count Logo was created by Justin Goff and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License.

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

1: Cuba Accuses Google’s YouTube of Censorship

First off today Cuba is accusing YouTube of censorship after the video sharing site took Cuba’s official video channel online, citing copyright infringement claims. According to YouTube, they received multiple copyright complaints regarding the account and, as according to their policy, shut it down. Specifically, YouTube cited infringement dealing with a recent video about former CIA agent Luis Posada Carriles, who was recently on trial in the US for immigration fraud. Cuba responded saying that “If Cubadebate (their account) is violating copyright then you have to shut down all of Youtube because it is the mecca of internet piracy.”

2: League of Epic Heroes Removed From App Store After Copyright Claim

Next up today, the popular iPhone game “League of Epic Heroes” has been removed from the App Store following a claim by QCF Design, which claim the game is too similar to their upcoming release “Desktop Dungeons”. Heroes was written by solo coder Eric Ferraro, who admitted that Desktop Dungeons was his inspiration for the game. The two sides had apparently tried to work out some kind of arrangement but were unable to resolve their differences, prompting QCF to file a takedown notice.

3: I Can Has Copyright Law: Ben Huh of the Cheezburger Network Talks About the Internet and Copyright

Finally today, Ben Huh, owner of the Cheeseburger network of sites, which includes “I Can Has Cheeseburger” and “Failblog” sat down with Eric Perrott from American University spoke on a panel at World’s Fair Use day to discuss copyright. What followed, according to article author Eric Perrott, was a series of contradictions about the nature of copyright law that shows just how complex these issues are. Among the contradictions were, on one hand, a desire to to completely scrap U.S. copyright law but, on the other, an acknowledgement that the DMCA takedown system, overall, works well. Thanks to Eric Perrott for the correction to this article!

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.

Want the Full Story?

Tune in every Wednesday evening at 6 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.

The 3 Count Logo was created by Justin Goff and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License.

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

1: Gawker Removes Leaked Sarah Palin Book Excerpts

First off today, Gawker media was forced to remove excerpts from Sarah Palin’s unreleased second book from its namesake blog after a copyright complaint by Palin’s publisher Harper Collins. Palin had seen the excerpts and tweeted about them, prompting another blog post from Gawker making fun of Palin’s displeasure, but Harper Collins filed suit against Gawker on Friday and received a court order that brought the excerpts down pending a cout hearing on the 30th. Gawker will most likely attempt to claim fair use in the excerpts but may have an uphill battle as unpublished works are granted greater protection.

2: “Put Up or Shut Up” Time for US Copyright Group

Next up today, the judge overseeing the U.S. Copyright Groups’ litigation against thousands of suspected file sharers may be running out of patience. With thousands of potential defendants already having been named by their ISPs, having received a settlement letter and not being named in the suit, the judge has given the group until December 6 to name those that it wished to sue in that court, an indication that the court is losing patience with the process. The U.S. Copyright Group had requested an extension of five years as the court had ruled Time Warner, a major ISP, was only required to send a few contacts per month, requiring five years for them to complete the entire list, but the judge ruled that would be unfair to the defendants who had already been named by their ISPs.

3: Daily Mail Accused of Copyright Infringement, Once Again

Finally today, the London newspaper the Daily Mail is in copyright hot water again after another photographer has found his photo being used on the paper’s site without permission or payment. The paper recently found itself in a lawsuit with another photographer, where the paper famously claimed that, since the image was distributed over TwitPic, that they had been given an implied license to use it. Most legal experts find that to be a stretch of an argument though the case is being closely watched.

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.

Want the Full Story?

Tune in every Wednesday evening at 6 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.

The 3 Count Logo was created by Justin Goff and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License.