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

1: Barack Obama Faces Pressure Over TVShack Extradition Case

First off today, yesterday President Obama held a Hangout on Google+ where he answered questions on a wide range of topics. One of the questions asked was regarding, Richard O’Dwyer, the former admin of TVShack, a site that posted links to unlawful streams of copyrighted content. O’Dwyer was arrested in his native UK but on charges here in the U.S., he is facing extradition to the U.S. to face criminal charges though, locally, he has not been charged. Obama, however, distanced himself from the case saying he was not directly involved in it. However, he reiterated that he sought to ensure intellectual property was protected while ensuring Internet freedoms. O’Dwyer’s mother said Obama’s reply was “a typical politician response.”

2: Long ‘Spawn’ Dispute Settled: Neil Gaiman Says Case is Good for Creators, ‘Incredibly Good’ for Copyright

Next up today, in a case that has been going on for almost a decade, author Neil Gaiman has settled his dispute with Spawn creator Todd McFarlane. The Spawn series, originally a comic book, centers around a former CIA agent who was killed and returns as a demon to fight crime. The dispute arose over two issues of the Spawn comic where the two writers teamed up and created several characters including Medieval Spawn and Angela, a bounty hunting angel. However, McFarlane had denied Gaiman royalties on later uses of the characters. A jury agreed with Gaiman, making him half author of the issues in question. The two have since resolved the remaining disagreements in a confidential settlement, putting an end to the case that began in 2002.

3: Newt Gingrich Sued for Use of “Eye of the Tiger”

Finally today, Republican Presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich is being sued by Frank M. Sullivan III, one of Survivor’s founding members, over Gingrich’s use of “Eye of the Tiger” at various campaign events. According to Sullivan, who is co-author of the song, Gingrich has used “Eye of the Tiger” at various appearances dating back to at least 2009. He is seeking a ban preventing further use of the song in addition to damages to be determined by the court. Gingrich’s campaign had no comment but it most likely won’t be the last of such lawsuits we see this campaign season.

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: 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: White House Wants New Copyright Law Crackdown

First off today, the Obama administration, through its Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator, Victoria Epinel, has drafted a report proposing sweeping copyright reforms including making it a felony to stream infringing content in some circumstances, allow use of wiretaps when investigating copyright cases and inform rightsholders when software and hardware designed to circumvent DRM is seized so that rightsholders can file suit if desired. It is unclear what will be made of the report and if any of it will become proposed legislation, but it is the clearest indication of the direction the Obama administration will take on copyright to date.

2: Chinese Writers Slam Baidu for Copyright Infringement

Next up today, a group of 50 Chinese authors have posted a petition slamming the nation’s largest search engine, Baidu, for what it calls copyright infringement. Specifically, the authors are upset that Baidu allows users to post their works and it appears many have done so. The letter, however, doesn’t fault those who post the work, calling them “friends”, but instead faults Baidu for its “vicious platform”, namely Baidu Library where the works are posted. The authors have threatened to quite writing altogether if the infringement does not cease and Baidu has responded saying that they remove infringing material when notified.

3: Ubisoft ‘Pirates’ Assassin’s Creed Brotherhood Music From Demonoid

Finally today, purchasers of the digital deluxe version of “Assassin’s Creed: Brotherhood” get a lot of interesting digital goodies, one of which is a downloadable copy of the game’s soundtrack. However, it appears that most of the files in the soundtrack were actually downloaded from a torrent. According to screenshots posted of the files, the tracks were encoded by someone named arsa13, who is a major name at the semi-private Bittorrent tracker Demonoid who had uploaded a torrent of the soundtrack previously. To make matters worse, the one file missing from arsa13′s torrent file was also the only track in the list not labeled as being encoded by him. This means that, most likely, Ubisoft downloaded a pirated torrent of their content to then redistribute to fans, rather than creating new version. Ubisoft’s, who is known for taking a very harsh stance on piracy, had a similar incident in 2008 where it used an illegal “No CD” crack of one of its games to patch it for digital distribution.

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: Judge Limits Potential LimeWire Copyright Payout to $1.5 Billion

First off today, in the Limewire case that is still ongoing, the judge has placed a limit on the potential monetary award by saying that the record labels do not deserve statutory damages for each dowload, but rather, just an award for each file infringed. However, with some 10,000 works being involved in the case, that means those damages could be anywhere between $7.5 million and $1.5 billion. A similar case with a separate set of record labels was settled last week while this one is schedule to go to court shortly.

2: AP Sues Urban Outfitters, Others Over ‘HOPE’ Image

Following the AP’s settlement with artist Shepard Fairey over the Obama “Hope” poster, AP has now gone after retailers that were selling the poster on various items, including Urban Outfitters Inc., Nordstrom Inc. and Zumiez Inc. This move comes as another case against a different clothing company is scheduled to go to trial later this month.

3: Group Challenges Arrest of Man for ‘Linking to Other Websites’

Finally today, Demand Progress has begun circulating a petition on behalf of Bryan McCarthy, the former owner of ChannelSurfing.net, which had his site seized and then was arrested by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). McCarthy’s site was one that embedded links to streams of various sporting events, most of which were posted online elsewhere unlawfully. According to the DHS and ICE, McCarthy’s actions were a form of criminal copyright infringement but Demand Progress claims that all he was doing was linking to sites, that the arrest is “shocking” and could affect other linking sites. Demand Progress plans on delivering its petition to ICE at the end of the week.

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: White House Will Propose New Digital Copyright Laws

First off today, the Obama adminstration, through its intellectual property enforcement coordinator, Victoria Espinel, is preparing to début a set of laws regarding digital copyright. Though the laws haven’t been announced, a recent report by Espinel has shown what is widely considered a “pro industry” stance, hinting that the laws will likely be an attempt to clamp down on piracy through stronger legislation. According to reports, the law is due to be sent to Congress “in the very near future.”

2: Emma Thompson Battles Playwright Over ‘Effie’ Film

Next up today actress and screenwriter Emma Thompson is heading to court to make the case that her newest film, “Effie”, is not a plagiarism of Gregory Murphy’s earlier play “The Countess”. The producers of “Effie” sued Murphy and are seeking a declaratory judgment that the film is non-infringing because, according to them, Murphy’s lawyers have hounded the production of the film and interfering with it. According to the producers, this is the last step needed to secure financing for the flim and enable filming to start.

3: Mardi Gras Costumes Inspire Photographers – and a Copyright Claim

Finally today, in an update of a story that hits close to home for me, several Mardi Gras indians, individuals who work all year to create elaborate headdress-style costumes for Mardi Gras, have copyrighted their creations and are planning on pursuing those who sell photos or paintings of their artwork. Historically, costumes and dress items can’t be copyrighted but their attorney, Ashlye Keaton, has registered them with the Copyright Office, claiming them to be works of art, not costumes. It remains to be seen if this angle will be enough to stop the calendar makers and the artists who have sold reproductions and images of the costumers for years.

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.

It is Friday again and that means that it is time for another episode of the Copyright 2.0 Show.

It was an exciting week for copyright news as we have a new, controversial nominee for Solicitor General in the U.S., the End of the ACS:Law litigation campaign, a massive lawsuit that could impact streaming video sites and a novel new approach to handling pirates (that isn’t very likely to work).

This week’s stories include:

• Obama Administration Nominates Former RIAA Attorney for Solicitor General
• ACS:Law Calls it Quits
• UFC Sues Justin.TV
• Movie Studio Asks File Sharers to Turn Themselves In
• A New Global Licensing Database for Music in the Works
• Record Industry Reports Another Bad Year, Blames Piracy
• Communist Revolutionary the Center of a Copyright Spat

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.

After a week away due to illness, we are back and with a vengeance and a ton of copyright news to cover. Not only do we have a strange settlement in one of the most important fair use cases in some time, but we have the record labels agreeing to pay for copyright infringement and a big win for Harry Potter in the states. All in all, there was a lot to talk about and this was an extremely busy show!

This week’s stories include:

• Shepard Fairey and AP Settle Case, End Dispute
• Record Labels Settle “Pending List” Lawsuit in Canada
• Harry Potter Plagiarism Lawsuit Tossed in the States
• Sony Targets PS3 Hackers
• Anti-Piracy Attorneys Team Up
• Much, Much More

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: Associated Press, Artist Settle in Obama ‘Hope’ Poster Lawsuit

First off today, Shepard Fairey, the artist behind the Obama “Hope” poster, has settled his long-running legal battle with the Associated Press. The AP, whose reporter took the photo that the poster was based on, claimed that the poster was an infringement but Fairey had claimed it was a fair use. However, the two sides agreed to disagree on the legal issues and Fairey has agreed to never use another AP photo in his artwork again. Also, there was an undisclosed financial settlement but we have no idea which way it went or for how much. A separate lawsuit involving a manufacturer of T-shirts with the image is continuing separately.

2: Sony Launches Legal Action Against PlayStation Hackers

Next up today, Sony has launched legal action against George Hotz and others who released the key for the PS3 that could, in the future, enable the running of any software on the system, including pirated games. Hotz, who is best known for breaking the security on the iPhone, is named alongside of 100 others associated with the hacking group fail0verflow, which was responsible for the leak. Hotz has said that he is confident the legal action won’t succeed and is ready to defend himself against it.

3: Record Labels To Pay $45 Million for Pirating Artists’ Music

Finally today, in Canada, record labels have agreed to pay some $45 million for copyright infringement. The lawsuit stems from a “pending list” in which labels would use tracks on compilation CDs and, rather than paying the royalties, put the track on the list to be paid later. Artists, fed up with the unpaid royalties sued the labels. Though the damages could have been as high as $6 billion, the two sides agreed on a settlement that would bring all existing pending list claims up to code. However, it seems that the practice itself is unlikely to change.

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.

For example, in politics, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, John McCain and Joe Biden have all faced allegations of plagiarism but, with the possible exception of Biden, all the scandals had more to do with politics than plagiarism.

While some plagiarism scandals do hold up, such as the Ben Domench scandal, the Kaavya Viswanathan scandal in literature and the Nick Simmons plagiarism scandal in Manga, most are like the Chris Anderson scandal or the Maureen Dowd scandal and are either blown out of proportion or are backed by weak evidence.

But whenever I debunk or even tame a plagiarism scandal, I am always asked ‘What does it take to get you on board?” or “What would convince you (person) is a plagiarist?”

There’s no easy answer to that and every scandal has to be taken on its merits. But there are some things I must have for me to consider a person a plagiarist, at least in the sense of the word that those pushing the scandal would like me to believe.

With that in mind, here are my five rules to consider and what I would say have to be met for me to believe that a person is actually a true plagiarist.

1. Proof of Copying

This one seems simple enough, but it’s the grounds on which the recent George W. Bush scandal fell apart. You have to be able to prove that the alleged plagiarist copied something.

While it’s true you can copy ideas, the idea has to be original enough and specific enough that it could not have been thought up independently to prove plagiarism. This is why most plagiarism scandals that stick focus on physical copying, whether its verbatim text reuse or tracing images or just outright copying files.

If the similar material could have easily been created independently, there can be no way, with certainty, to call one a plagiarist with any certainty.

2. Proof They Were Involved

While I agree that when one is a political candidate or other public figure they have ultimate responsibility for their speeches, books, etc. distributed under their name. But when you say someone is a plagiarist, you are accusing them of the act of plagiarism. To say that, you have to show they were at least involved in the act of creating the work.

When and if a politician gives a plagiarized speech, he or she probably had little to no hand in writing it. Though they have responsibility for it, it’s hard to call them a plagiarist though you may be able to argue they were sloppy in their handling of their speech or lazy in having others ghostwrite it without first checking it.

To really rake someone’s reputation over the coals over a plagiarism allegation, one needs to show that they were directly involved in the act, and not merely handed the work.

3. Violation of Ethical Standards

Next, it has to be shown that the copying and plagiarism was a violation of relevant ethical standards and, surprisingly, these standards can be very relative.

For example, those who work in the legal profession are held to a very different standard than those in the academic or literary profession. The copying and use of content has to go above and beyond what would be considered acceptable in the field it was in.

This was a part of why the Nick Simmons scandal was so egregious and the Obama scandal much less so. Not only was the amount and severity of the copying different, but the differing ethical standards between creating an original Manga and political speechwriting set the bar higher in the Obama case.

4. No Attempt at Attribution

This one seems straightforward, but there are constantly scandals that seem to tread into the gray area of what is or is not acceptable attribution.

What if you attribute a quote in a speech but leave off the attribution by accident once after giving it half a dozen times? What if the goal isn’t plagiarism, but homage and you feel your readers are smart enough to understand what you’re trying to do? What if you don’t provide proper footnotes but, instead, only offer a bibliography or a nod in the introduction?

There are very few areas where a citation standard is set in stone, the academic arena being one. If the citations standards fail to meet the ethical requirements of an industry, that is one thing (as per item 3), but if its a gray area issue with no set or even common practice, I’ll be more hesitant to use the “p word”.

I may call them sloppy and question their methodology, but if there was an honest attempt to attribute the work, I’m hard pressed to call someone a plagiarist because it fell short of a non-codified standard.

5. More Than Just a Goof

Though I don’t believe plagiarism requires malice, I also recognize we’re all human and will make mistakes. One omitted citation, especially when the rest of the work is cited properly, does not make a person a plagiarist. Go through anyone’s lifetime of works, including my own, and you’ll find mistakes and errors made in citation.

To convince me to join the mob and shout someone down as a plagiarist, one has to be able to show that they at least are guilty of negligence or recklessness. Someone who makes a good-faith attempt and gets most of the citations right should be forgiven for the rare mistake.

After all, we’re all human and if we shout each other down for making mistakes soon there won’t be anyone left standing.

Bottom Line

To be clear, these are just the rules I have for calling someone a plagiarist in the sense those caught up in a plagiarism scandal are doing so. There’s a whole wide gray area between this kind of “grab the torches” anger and someone who is completely innocent.

Most plagiarism scandals are, quite frankly, blown well out of proportion. Some are outright fabrications but most are built on some grain of truth that gets expanded beyond all reason. Whether it’s a coincidence, a mistake, a minor infraction or just a one-time incident, most scandals start somewhere just a shade gray of innocent and wind up being blown up until the subject’s reputation is destroyed, often needlessly.

While some plagiarism scandals do pan out, as mentioned at the beginning, most do not. It’s important to not get too carried away with calling people a plagiarist not just because it ruins lives and diminishes the meaning of the word and the act itself.

After all, if everyone can be accused of plagiarism, then being a plagiarist is not such a bad thing at all.

Last week I gave an interview via satellite with Boise TV station KTVB (Note: I had mistakenly said on Twitter it was KBOI) about the Vaughn Ward plagiarism scandal. The interview was part of a larger special on plagiarism in politics and the scandal itself.

To recap what had happened, Ward was, at the time, a Republican candidate in the Senate primary. He was accused of plagiarizing President Obama’s speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2004. The accusations were originally made by a Republican blogger, Lucas Baumbach, who was also seeking a State Senate seat.

Ward lost the primary and is now out of the election completely.

You can view the original YouTube video here.

The interview is embedded below, you can view other segments from the special here.