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

1: Chinese Authors Sue Apple for Copyright Infringement

First off today, a group of nine Chinese authors have reportedly filed suit against Apple for some 11.9 million yuan ($1.9 million) over allegedly infringing books in the iTunes App Store. According to the authors, they have tried to work with Apple to get the infringing books removed with no luck. The same group of authors has also taken on the Chinese search engine Baidu and Google over similar issues.

2: Leader of NinjaVideo.Net Website Sentenced to 22 Months in Prison for Criminal Copyright Conspiracy

Next up today, Hana Amal Beshara, one of the co-founders of the site NinjaVideo, has been sentenced to 22 months in prison, two years supervised release and 500 hours of community service as part of her plea deal in the case. Beshara was one of the founders and leaders of the site, which serviced as a haven for a variety of pirated video content and was open from 2008 until it was closed in 2010 by the government. Three other defendants have also been arrested and have pleaded guilty and are awaiting sentencing. Another, located in Greece, still has not been arrested.

3: Is It About to Get Much Easier for Artists to Bring Copyright-Infringement Lawsuits?

Finally today, The U.S. Copyright Office is accepting public comment on the idea of setting up a small claims court for smaller copyright matters. Currently, all copyright issues in the U.S. have to go through Federal court, regardless of size and money involved, and this leads to a great deal of expense that often isn’t able to be recouped. The idea of a small claims court would be to remove attorneys from the matter and make the litigation process cheaper, lowering the cost of both filing and defending such lawsuits. The public comment period ends January 16.

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 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.

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: RIAA Wants ReDigi Out of the Business of Selling “Used” iTunes Tracks

First off today, music retailer ReDigi has received a cease and desist notice from the RIAA claiming that the company is infringing on the rights of musicians by reselling “used” iTunes tracks. ReDigi’s process verifies that the tracks are legally bought and then removes all copies of it from the original computer and then puts it up for resale on their site at a drastically reduced price. According to the RIAA, this remains an infringement as copyright law does not allow an owner to make a copy of a file, resell the copy and then destroy the original. ReDigi, however, had an analysis of their own done and found that their service is legit. The RIAA also takes issue with ReDigi’s music sampling service, which allows potential buyers to listen to 30-second clips of the songs.

2: Copyright Group Tries to Collect Cash From Open Source Event

Next up today, in German, a rights group named GEMA has demanded that the organizers of two dance parties, held simultaneously in Weimar and Leipzig, pay 200 Euros ($270) for using music GEMA holds licensing rights to. However, the two parties were open source-themed and DJs were instructed to only play Creative Commons-Licensed music. Even stranger, a quirk in German law makes it so that GEMA doesn’t have to prove that any artists they represent were played and, instead, the organizers must prove that they weren’t. The German Pirate Party, however, wishes to challenge the case.

3: Apple launches iTunes Match in the U.S.

Finally today, those who have been waiting for iTunes Music Match will now have their chance to sign up. The service works by enabling iTunes users to sync their music with the cloud. This includes both tracks bought through iTunes and those acquired elsewhere. Those tracks, if they are part of iTunes’ database, are replaced with high-quality version from iTunes and synced that way. If the tracks are unavailable, the originals are synced.The service costs $25 per year and covers 25,000 songs.

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 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.

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

It’s Friday again and that means it’s time for another episode of the Copyright 2.0 Show!

It was a busy week for copyright news as we get to learn about another feature of iCloud Music Match, a copyright attack takes down official music videos of Justin Bieber and Lady Gaga among others. Also, former Pirate Bay admins start a new project that they promise will be legitimate and it could be the beginning of the end for compulsory licenses for TV and satellite providers.

All in all, this is one jam-packed episode with a lot of great talking points and some food for thought that you do not want to miss out on.

This week’s stories include:

• iCloud to Offer Streaming Services (Kind of)
• False Copyright Notices Briefly Remove Justin Bieber and Lady Gaga Videos
• Pirate Bay Admins to Start File Locker Service, Go Legit
• Copyright Office Proposes Ending Statutory Licenses for Satellite and Cable
• Google, La Martiniere Reach Settlement of Book Scanning
• Chinese Funeral Fakes Spark Copyright Debate

You can download the MP3 file here (direct download). Those interested in subscribing to the show can do so via this feed.

Show Notes

About the Hosts

Jonathan Bailey

Jonathan Bailey (@plagiarismtoday) is the Webmaster and author of Plagiarism Today (Hint: You’re there now) and works as a copyright and plagiarism consultant. Though not an attorney, he has resolved over 700 cases of plagiarism involving his own work and has helped countless others protect their work and develop strategies for making their content work as hard as possible toward their goals.

Patrick O’Keefe

Patrick O’Keefe (@iFroggy) is the owner of the iFroggy Network, a network of websites covering various interests. He’s the author of the book “Managing Online Forums,” a practical guide to managing online communities and social spaces. He maintains a blog about online community management at ManagingCommunities.com and a personal blog at patrickokeefe.com.

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

1: Justin Bieber, Gaga Fans Enraged as Videos Disappear from YouTube

First off today, Justin Beiber and Lady Gaga fell victim to a prankster named “ILCreative” that filed a copyright complaint against all of their videos. Other stars, including Rihanna, Miley Cyrus and Beyonce all had some of their videos removed. All of the removed videos have been restored, but fans launched a Twitter campaign against IlCreative, many of whom threatened the unnamed person. The DMCA provides penalties for filing false DMCA notices but it is unclear if IlCreative used the full DMCA process.

2: File-sharing Site Bayfiles ‘To Respect Copyrights’

Next up today, two of the original founders of The Pirate Bay are starting up a new site, Bayfiles, that will function as a one-click hosting site. However, the pair has said that the site will respect copyright law and remove infringing material. The site will work like Rapidshare and other one-click hosting sites in that users will upload files, up to 500 MB in size and be given a link to allows others access to download it. The site has already registered a DMCA agent with the U.S. Copyright Office to receive notices of copyright infringement.

3: New iTunes Match Feature Revealed: Music Streaming From The Cloud Coming Soon

Finally today, as a new developer beta of iOS has been sent out, enabling testers to sign up for Apple’s iCLoud service, a new feature has been discovered, streaming music from the cloud. The feature, which disappointed many when it was not shown during Apple’s unveiling of the iCloud service, enables users to stream their music from Apple’s servers and not having them stored locally on their computer or phone. The move pits Apple more head-to-head with Google Music and Amazon Cloud MP3.

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 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.

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: Senate Committee Agrees Illegal Streaming is a Felony

First off today, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee has approved the Commercial Felony Streaming Act, which would make the unlicensed streaming of copyrighted content for commercial use a felony. The act closes what is widely seen as a loophole in the law, one where uploading and downloading such content is a crime but streaming is not expressly mentioned. The bill will now move to the Senate floor where it is expected to receive wide support from legislators and the President alike.

2: Rebecca Black Pulls Infamous ‘Friday’ Video From YouTube

Next up today, the copyright battle between Rebecca Black, the singer behind the infamous “Friday” music video, and ARK Music Factory, the vanity publisher who helped create the video and song, is heating up. Earlier in the week ARK had made the song available for rent for $2.99 prompting Black’s attorneys to file a DMCA takedown notice on the song and get the video, which had received well over 150 million views, removed from the Web.

3: Why iTunes Match has Indie Soul Label Singing the Blues

Finally today, even though all the four major record labels are on board with iTunes Match, Apple’s new service to help move tracks, no matter where they were acquired, into the cloud, some smaller labels are not so sure. This includes Chicago-based Numero Group, which has lashed out at iTunes Match publicly. According to them, there is “great risk” in what Apple and the other labels are doing and called Apple’s offer both a “pittance” and an “insult” while saying that it was not in line with their responsibility to their artists to take the offer. However, the label’s representative did say that, for consumers, iTunes Match is great and that he would continue to buy tracks from iTunes and use the free syncing feature for purchased tracks.

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.

Of particular interest to those interested in copyright is how iCloud works, or will work, with iTunes and music and music. On that front, Apple made two announcements, the first was that iCloud would make it easy to sync and download purchased music on all devices with the same iTunes account, a feature widely expected and non-controversial.

The second, however, was regarding its paid iTunes Match service which, for $25 per year, will allow users to match non-iTunes music they have in their library, including tracks ripped from CD, purchased from other vendors or downloaded illegally, and have that music replaced with high-quality official versions from the iTunes store that are also synced via iCloud.

As a result of this, iTunes Match has been called everything from amnesty for pirates, a laundering service for pirated music and even a surrender by the record labels on the issue of piracy.

However, a recent article by FastCompany (sent to me by Patrick O’Keefe) paints a very different picture of iCloud’s replationship to piracy. According to it, music executives, most of whom have already inked deals to make the service happen, are on board with the idea for many reasons including to recoup at least some money from pirated tracks, which were previously a total loss, and gain some analytics about what users are listening to and downloading.

More importantly though, labels view this as a way of getting pirates used to paying something, anything, for music again as they prepare to move to the next phase of music distribution, subscription services, which many hope will eventually replace individual sales as the primary way consumers pay for music.

But regardless of the future plans, iTunes Match has implications on the larger piracy fight, though they probably aren’t as great as some people think.

Not a White Flag, But a Different Attack

Historically, the record industry has not been the best tacticians when it comes to piracy. Not only did they famously sue thousands of individuals for file sharing, but they also let nearly four years pass between when they first filed suit against Napster and the launch of their first serious legitimate alternative.

However, in more recent years they have gotten a great deal more savvy about how to deal with piracy and far more creative. For example, the record labels’ close relationship with YouTube has not only opened up a new, often very lucrative, revenue stream but it also has had an impact on music piracy by giving would-be casual pirates a legitimate, free and convenient option for listening to music and watching music videos.

This is similar in many ways to services such as Spotify in Europe have also provided a quick music-listening fix for those who want to listen to a track as a trial or get a song out of their head.

The impact of this strategy is debatable because of so many variables at play, but a recent study found that music files were extremely rare on P2P networks, replaced instead by movies, software, pornography, etc.

The record labels have, in recent years, put a focus on developing services and relationships that beat piracy at its own game while still earning them revenue. Though they haven’t been able to turn around their sagging profits yet, there has definitely been a noticeable impact, at least among pirates.

All of this being said, piracy is not going away as an issue for the record labels, instead, it may even be growing in importance, especially during this period of transition.

Still Focused on Piracy

As recently as February Universal Music Group’s head of digital said that piracy was his company’s “biggest global issue.”

Piracy and traditional piracy enforcement isn’t going away for the record labels. Instead, they are finally integrating their piracy enforcement as part of a larger strategy, one that is designed to woo casual pirates back to the fold while trying to decrease the damage piracy does to their bottom line.

This continued focus on piracy has shown in the policy and lobbying efforts. The RIAA recently came out strongly in favor of the controversial PROTECT IP bill in the U.S., which will enable the blocking of suspected pirate website along with other piracy countermeasures. Though the record labels softened their stance in Australia, backing away from encouraging the disconnection of suspected pirates, they are still favoring other, unspecified, actions be taken against pirates.

If there was an actual “white flag” moment for the record labels on the issue of piracy, it came when the industry announced they were no longer suing individuals for file sharing. But what it really turned out to be was a change in tactics in the fight against piracy, one that steps away from a legal fight with individuals and one that targets distributors of unlawful content.

This focus is likely to continue because the success or failure of iTunes Match and iCloud will largely depend on how many former pirates it brings into the fold. If illegal options are too easy, too freely available and too widespread iTunes Match could, very easily, become nothing more than a piracy laundering service, one where pirates do little more than legitimize ill-gotten tracks.

In fact, theoretically, things could actually get worse with iTunes Match if legitimate customers decide it is cheaper and easier to pirate tracks and “launder” them through iTunes, actually costing them potential revenue with many customers.

To prevent this, as well as to set the stage for subscription services, record labels have to make sure that legitimate options are easier and better than illegal alternatives and part of that means engaging in at least some piracy enforcement.

However, that enforcement doesn’t have to come in the form of a war against individuals, something the record labels have already shown. It will instead be waged against sites and companies that make music available illegally. Targeting the distribution network of pirated music, not people obtaining and sharing it.

Bottom Line

So what does iTunes Cloud and iTunes Match mean for piracy enforcement. Something I’ve been saying on this site for a long time, that piracy enforcement can only be a part of a larger strategy. The record labels are seeing that and iTunes Match is as much a part of their anti-piracy strategy as their lawsuit against LimeWire.

There’s no silver bullet answer for the challenges the Web has created for copyright holders of all sizes. Surviving, let alone thriving, is going to involve a multi-pronged approach coupled with some significant risks.

The record labels are seeing that and are responding to piracy with a cohesive strategy that seems to be generating at least some positive results.

The movie studios, however, are still using record label tactics from the mid 2000s (at least in some cases), suing file sharers by the thousand in a campaign fraught with legal woes.

That being said, many of the movie studios are also growing wise too, working closely with Netflix to provide a cheap, on-demand and reliable service that can easily compete with pirate offerings in terms features, convenience and even price.

However, the movie industry, from a business standpoint, has different challenges it has to face online which may mean the models that may work for the record industry will need to be rewritten to work for them.

In many ways, they are in a similar position to the music industry, only the music industry has a long head start on tackling their issues.

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

1: Apple iCloud — Amnesty for Music Pirates?

First off today, Apple introduced its upcoming iCloud service, which, in part, is aimed at making your music purchases and downloads available across all of your devices. Apple also introduced an add on service called “Music Match” that scans your library and replaces ripped (or downloaded) songs with high-quality tracks from the iTunes store. Though iCloud is free, Music Match will be $25 per year. Music Match, which has the approval of all four of the major record labels, is already being called “amnesty” for pirates because it will convert many illegally downloaded tracks into legal copies. How true this is remains to be seen but it may be an attempt by the record labels to earn some revenue from pirated tracks, even if only a fraction of their legal value.

2: Govt Won’t Revisit Copyright Law

Next up today, the New Zealand government has announced that they will not be revisiting their three strikes law, which will disconnect suspected file sharers after a number of warnings, despite a recent UN report calling such laws a violation of human rights. According to the government, the disconnection system would only be implemented if a warning system was deemed to be ineffective, which mitigates the potential concerns over the law.

3: Forever 21 Forever 21′s David and Goliath Attempt to Stomp Out Blogger

Finally today, clothing store Forever 21 filed a cease and desist letter with the site WTForever21.com claiming copyright infringement, trademark infringement, unfair competition and dilution. The site, which lampoons some of the company’s fashions, received the letter in April and, after months of legal volleying, has been given a 10-day ultimatum to either shut down or face a lawsuit. It is unclear what Rachel Kane, the blogger behind the site, intends to do.

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: Media Companies Say E-reader Application Zite Takes Content Without Permission

First off today, nearly a dozen media companies have sued Zite, the company that created the popular iPad ereader with the same name, claiming copyright infringement. According to the claimants, which include Dow Jones, National Geographic and Time, Zite’s application unlawfully reproduces images and stories from their publications without permission. Zite functions as a personalized magazine for the iPad, taking news from the user’s desired source and formatting them for easy reading on the iPad.

2: EMI Loses Down Under Court Appeal

Next up today, EMI lost its appeal over the popular 1983 Men at Work song “Down Under”. Publisher Larrikin Music had sued EMI saying that “Down Under” unlawfully used the melody from the 70-year-old children’s song “Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gum Tree”. The lower court agreed with Larrikin, saying that the song was an infringement, and the Appeals Court has upheld that ruling, ordering EMI to pay five percent of the song’s royalties accrued since 2002. There is no word if EMI may appeal the case to Australia’s High Court.

3: Study: US Digital Music Will Overtake CDs in 2012

Finally today, a study by Strategy Analytics indicates that, in the U.S. digital music sales may eclipse physical sales next year. This, according to their estimates, will happen as physical sales will plummet and digital sales will inch forward, overtaking it. Also, according to the report, digital downloads will be the predominant format on into 2015 with subscription services lagging behind.

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: iTunes Films Bust Copyright Laws

First off today, according to the BBC, several Soviet-era films including Gentlemen of Fortune, Assa, The Diamond Arm, Kin-dza-dza and Cheburashka have appeared in iTunes without the permission the copyright holders. The owners of the films, Russian film studio Mosfilm and the Joint State Film Collection, have said that they gave no permission for the films to be made available online other than their site, however, they are available as apps in the iTunes app store. Apple and the film studios have both said that they will investigate though there is no talk of litigation at this time.

2: Cudo Takes Aim at Group-Buying Aggregator, Alleges Copyright Infringement

Next up today, group buying site Cudo has sent a cease and desist letter to group buying aggregator Buyii claiming that the site is not only aggregating the deals from Cudo, but is also reusing the site’s content. According to Cudo, Buyii is also attempting to mislead both visitors and search engines into thinking they are or represent Cudo. Buyii, however, strongly disagrees with this stance and has vowed to continue using Cudo’s deals in its feeds.

3: Francis Ford Coppola: On Risk, Money, Craft & Collaboration

Finally today, famous director Francis Ford Coppola said, in a controversial interview, that maybe artists, musicians and movie makers, such as himself, should not be paid for their craft and that, perhaps, those downloading music and movie unlawfully may be right. According to Coppola, artists should expect to work another job and then work on their craft separately from that, with no expectation of income. He goes on to say, “Try to disconnect the idea of cinema with the idea of making a living and money,” a statement that, most likely, won’t win him many friends in Hollywood.

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.