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

1: RIAA Pushes Google, Verizon for Piracy Crackdown

First off today, even as the net neutrality debate heats up on the heels of a “compromise” proposal between Google and Verizon, the RIAA and twelve other groups representing musicians have stepped in asking that any legislation or compromise on the subject encourage ISPs to block illegal content and deter unlawful activity, including copyright infringement. This is not the first time copyright holders have interjected themselves into the net neutrality debate, the latest being in January when the RIAA asked the FCC to adopt “flexible” rules that enable filtering of infringing content.

2: ‘Innocent Infringer’ Copyright Defense for Downloaders Goes to U.S. Supreme Court

Next up today, in a move that was widely predicted, Charles Nesson has filed a brief with the Supreme Court on the case of Whitney Harper to the Supreme Court. Lower courts ruled that Harper was not an “innocent infringer” and thus not eligible for lower damages for trading files over file sharing networks including Kazaa though Harper, who was 16 at the time of the infringement, said she had no idea what she was doing was illegal. The Appeals Court ruled that copyright notices on the CDs were adequate notice even though the files were traded digitally. Nesson filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court to ask them to reverse the Appeals Court ruling, which in turn reversed the District Court’s ruling.

3: Copycats vs. Copyrights

Finally today, as the Innovative Design Protection and Piracy Prevention Act seeks to extend very limited copyright protection to the fashion industry, where no such protection exists currently, many are wondering if it is wise or even necessary as the U.S. has a thriving fashion industry without it. This article on Newsweek delves into the issue, looking at both sides of the debate and asks some very difficult questions about the role of copyright in the digital age.

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: Kazaa Relaunches In The Cloud

First off today Kazaa, the former file sharing service shuttered following a lawsuit by the recording industry, has relaunched as a legit music streaming service. Charging $15 per month, Kazaa offers access to some 1.6 million tracks and, most uniquely, 1 million lyrics. Though the number of songs available pales in comparison to competing services, such as 10 million on Napster, it will be interesting to see if and how Kazaa is able to break into this particular space.

2: Gawker Pays to Settle ‘McSteamy’ Copyright Suit

Next up today, Gawker Media, which leaked a sex tape involving actors Eric Dane and Rebecca Gayheart has settled a copyright infringement suit by the two stars. According to reports, Gawker paid in the lower 6-figure range to settle the case. The couple had suffered a setback after a judge ruled they could not claim statutory damages since they registered the tape after the leak took place. However, the couple claimed that they still were owed Gawker’s profits from the leak but Gawker had defended the posting as fair use. The case had entered forced arbitration, which brought about the settlement.

3: EFF Offers New Help for Targets of Predatory Copyright Infringement Lawsuits

Finally today, if you’ve been a target in the recent U.S. Copyright Group lawsuits, the Electronic Frontier Foundation has a new resource that may be able to help. The EFF has a new guide on the USCG lawsuits, including, FAQs, information about possible defenses and help in locating an attorney to help take up the case. The site also has some information for attorneys interested in the case and a means for them to sign up to help.

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.

1: Kazaa creators open legal music service for iPhone

First off today, the founders of the Kazaa file sharing service, which was shut down in a lawsuit by the RIAA, have resurfaced and are launching Rdio, a legitimate music streaming service targeted at the iPhone and other smartphone platforms. A beta version is available in the App store for the iPhone and Blackberry. The Web-only service will cost $5 per month and one for mobile devices will cost $10. Rdio will also allow users follow one another, share what they are listening to and make at least some tracks publicly available.

2: Appeals Court Sides with NBC Universal in ‘Ghost Hunters’ Idea Theft Case

Next up today, two TV hopefuls suffered a setback in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals after the court ruled against them in their lawsuit against NBC Universal, the owners of the Syfy Network. According to the plaintiffs, they approached NBC with an idea remarkably similar to the “Ghost Hunters” series on Syfy only to be turned down and have their idea ripped off. Initially the district court threw out their breach of implied contract and breach of confidence while letting their copyright arguments move forward. However, the duo allowed their copyright claims to be dismissed, likely due to a lack of probable success and appealed the previous two claims, which they’ve now lost.

3: Don Henley Wins Copyright Infringement Case Against Politician

Finally today, musician Don Henley won his copyright case against California Assemblyman Chuck DeVore. Devore had rewritten lyrics to “The Boys of Summer” and “All She Wants to Do is Dance” and had argued that his use of the songs was a fair use protected under parody. The court, however, disagreed saying that since the revised lyrics did not make fun of the songs or the author, they were not protected parody. No word on if an appeal will be filed.

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.

At least one of the files being distributed on BitTorrent claiming to be the book was, in truth, a copy of a fan fiction work entitled “The Seventh Horcrux” by Melindaleo.

Though Melindaleo already gives her fan fiction work away for free on the Web, the misattribution was very disturbing for her. As she said in an email, “I got nervous that I’d be jinxing the whole fanfic writing thing for everyone.”

Worse still, she was also worried about ending up in the cross hairs of J.K. Rowling, her publisher and her lawyers.

Even though Rowling has supported and condoned the fan fiction community that has sprung up around Harry Potter, this does not bode well for her either. After all, some may believe the book to be the actual release and not bother picking up a real copy when it is release, at least not until they discover the error.

No one wins with this misidentification but it is a situation that is becoming all too common on file sharing networks. Misattributed files are hurting authors, including those who want their work on the networks, and are limiting the usefulness of the services to promote new music, art and literature.

A Musician’s Dilemma

Though piracy has gotten the lion’s share of attention when it comes to file sharing, those who have wanted to use the file sharing networks as a tool to promote their art have been haunted by a different problem, misattributed files. This has been especially true for musicians that have been trying to grow their careers using the various networks.

Some, especially lesser known artists, have had their music attributed to other groups, usually more popular musicians. Others, such as Weird Al (see May 2000 column), have had other people’s music misattributed to them, often tarnishing their reputation.

Sometimes the misattribution is intentional. Both movie studios and record labels are known for flooding the file sharing networks with false files in an attempt to hinder the downloading of pirated material. Most of the time though, the misattribution is accidental, the uploader unsure or misinformed about the creator of the work uploads it with incorrect credentials.

This is extremely frustrating to artists that want to use file sharing networks in an attempt to promote their careers. If the music files they share don’t have the correct name on them, then all of the free downloads do them no good, serving instead as false promotion for artists that had nothing to do with the song.

However, even the bands getting the promotion gain nothing. With no albums containing the song and means of playing them at concerts. They can not live up to the expectations the file creates. They also run the risk of being accused of plagiarism down the road, even if they had nothing to do with the change in attribution.

It’s an annoying problem that is now spreading to other genres.

A Spreading Problem

Of course, file sharing has not been limited to music for many years. Now, any type of file can be shared including video, software, music, images and text.

Sadly, all of them suffer, in varying degrees from misidentification.

Video and image files suffer the least, those files are easily watermarked visually and those marks are very difficult to remove. Audio files, however, rely upon embedded tags that can either be easily changed or, depending on how the song was ripped, added incorrectly in the beginning.

Text, however, is the easiest to plagiarize and misidentify. File names can be changed easily and attribution can be removed, lost or altered very easily. It is also easy to mistakenly not copy attribution when selecting a large block of text and accidentally pass around a file with no author information attached at all.

In this regard, the content is exactly like the rest of the Web in what is and is not easy to plagiarize. However, books are very rarely traded on file sharing networks (Note: study done by bandwidth, not file count, still searching for new study) and only major authors, such as Rowling, are sought after on them.

In that aspect, Melindaleo’s case is exceptionally rare. With very few books being traded on file sharing networks, it is unlikely that many authors will have significant issues with file sharing networks, unless they become very popular offline first.

Still, artists working in other types of media need to consider taking precautions to prevent their work from being misattributed, or even outright plagiarized, over the file sharing networks.

Preventing the Problem

If you’re a content producer, especially if you work heavily in audio or video, you need to take some basic precautions to ensure the integrity of your attribution:

1. Post It Yourself: If you are comfortable with users sharing your files, don’t just tell them they can legally rip and download them, do it yourself. Rip your own files and post them to the various networks. This not only ensures the quality of the media, but that the attribution takes the exact form you want.
2. Watermark Everything: Images and video both should be visibly watermarked if they are going to be distributed. Small, out of the way watermarks on both are very hard to remove and will carry with the work as it is copied and redownloaded, no matter how many times the name is changed.
3. Don’t Rely On Tags: ID3 tags on MP3s are too easily altered and removed. If you plan on using file sharing to promote your music, an audio tag at the end of the file is a better solution. Though it can be cut off with editing software, that is less likely to happen that it be overwritten by a program that can manipulate ID3 tags.
4. Multiple Attribution Points for Text: If you plan on posting a very lengthy work of text, include several points of attribution inside the work, perhaps one at each chapter, to avoid it from being easily or accidentally removed.
5. Hashing For Protection: If you plan to offer your files for download on file sharing networks, have an official page where you post the hashes for the files. This way downloaders can be certain they got an authentic copy of the file and that all of the information in it is correct.

The problem with file sharing is that, once a misattributed file gets out, there’s almost no way to reel it back in. Though one can use the matching files feature to find works with the same content but different names, there’s almost no way to stop their distribution other than sending messages to the people distributing the misidentified files and asking them to change it.

It is far more productive to focus on prevention and flood the market with properly attributed files than try to stop erroneous ones creep out.

Conclusions

Fortunately, the Melindaleo story seems to be coming to a nice enough conclusion. Though the misattributed file is still available, Melidaleo has been in contact with Rowling’s agents and they are very understanding about the situation, leaving the next course of action up to her.

As the truth has gotten out about her story, she has drawn some very real and very positive attention for her efforts. The story has even gartered high praise from some who have downloaded it and later learned of the source.

However, others who have their works plagiarized and misattributed on file sharing networks may not be so lucky. Some songs and videos that are passed around regularly may never be traced back to their origin, not without serious research, and those creators are unlikely to see any significant benefit from the sharing.

The hope is that, as technology advances and sharing becomes both more common and more acceptable, that better ways to ensure attribution will be protected.

After all, file sharing may constitute piracy in some cases, but it is not supposed to be about plagiarism. Attribution costs nothing and giving credit where it is due is still good manners.

Hopefully that will improve as time goes on.