Pirates have a long history of adapting and evolving to respond to new threats and challenges. Whether it’s a matter of adapting an existing system or creating an entirely new one, where there has been a will to obtain illegal copies of files, there’s been a way.

But while the old means haven’t truly died off, people still buy bootleg DVDs and trade files on Usenet after all, the new methods become more popular and become the focus of both pirates and anti-pirates alike. But these changes do more than provide new ways to access the same files, they actually change the nature of piracy and how people approach it. This, in turn, changes how it affects content creators and how, if they choose, they fight it.

While the potential impacts are literally too many to count, here are five of the bigger changes in piracy and what they likely mean for you.

1. Long Tail Piracy is Growing

With traditional P2P networks and Bittorrent trackers, one of the limitations was that there had to be some pretty significant interest in a work before piracy of it was practical. If there wasn’t at least a certain number of people interested in sharing the file, you probably couldn’t find it. As such, for a creator, piracy was almost a good problem to have as it was a sign of popularity.

However, with the shift to cyberlockers, it’s practical to share fies with much less interest. A link on a cyberlocker site can just as easily be downloaded by one person as a million.

The Impact: Niche content that often escaped being traded illegally online is now being swapped freely. Smaller and niche content creators need to look harder at piracy issues and decide if and how they want to respond.

2. Moving Away from the U.S.

Though the U.S. certainly hasn’t had the most piracy-friendly laws for services hosted in it, it’s domains (.com, .net and .org) have been popular among pirates and U.S. hosts, noted for being cheap, reliable and close to the bulk of the target audience, have been favorites among such sites.

However, the recent domain seizures and the shuttering of Megaupload has pirates rethinking this. Not only has The Pirate Bay moved to a .se domain, but other sites are bailing out of the country. New ones are less likely to start up within it.

The Impact: Most of the world has a reasonably strong notice and takedown system and, as the recent seizure of ex.ua in Ukraine shows, there aren’t too many true safe havens for pirates in the world. However, enforcing copyright may become more difficult, especially with sites that move into unfriendly territory. Regardless, it’s going to require becoming more familiar with working within a greater number of countries.

3. Appearance of Legitimacy

Pirate-friendly sites have routinely made claims that they are “just like Google” or other legitimate services. However, such sites have made a greater effort in recent months and years to promote this image, claiming to comply with DMCA notices, even when they don’t (as with Megaupload) and put on a more “corporate” face.

Much of this is in hopes of keeping law enforcement and attorneys at bay, but it’s also part of an effort to appeal to other businesses and consumers to secure advertisers and direct payments.

The Impact: This can create a sense of confusion among some consumers, who at least at times, think that the services are legitimate. Though someone who visits The Pirate Bay isn’t likely a lost customer, someone who Googles for a product and forks money over to a cyberlocker site for an illegal download may well be.

4. Spam, Spam and More Spam

Though spammers have always targeted pirate-related keywords and continue to do so, those efforts seem to have been accelerated in recent months or years as various services use spam keywords to target almost any work you would want to download.

If you search for a work in Google the results are going to be cluttered with fake “download” results that do any number of unscrupulous things including tricking customers to pay for a file that isn’t there, obtain information for identity theft or simply cram more spam advertisements at the viewer.

The Impact: This, in some part, mitigates the first and third changes. Finding pirated content is harder, especially on long tail items, because of these spam results. While the unethical and illegal things they do certainly don’t justify it, this is possibly the only time spammers have ever helped legitimate content creators.

5. Mirrored Uploading/Multiuploading

Finally, one trend that has been growing in recent years is the increased use of tools that automatically upload one file to multiple services. With these tools, one user can upload one file and have it appear on a dozen or more cyberlocker services.

While these tools aren’t new and have been popular in some circles for a long time, many hubs are starting to demand their usage to improve reliable access to files and their use among pirates is likely to grow.

The Impact: Obviously, this is going to make it much more difficult to remove works from the Web. Rather than dealing with one infringing copy, you may be dealing with a dozen or more. This means more work and, in some cases, more expense.

Bottom Line

On one hand, the future when dealing with piracy seems pretty bleak. Pirates are targeting different types of works and doing so in ways that is more difficult to stop. However, there are also reasons to be hopeful. Not only do the techniques for removing content remain, overall, fairly effective but new business models are being created by legitimate companies that may help compete with piracy and deal it a stronger blow.

All in all, these steps are just the next evolution in piracy and it’s an evolution that’s been going on for a long as there have been copyrighted works.

Piracy has been a part of being a content creator since day one and it isn’t going to go away. However, with time and effort, it may become more of a nuisance than a major concern and that, in the long run, should be the end goal. Not the elimination of piracy, but the mitigation of it.

Pirate Flag Photo Credit: BigStockPhoto.com

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

1: Capitol Records Sues ReDigi: EMI Label Alleges Copyright Infringement by ‘Used’ Digital Music Site

First off today, Capital Records, the flagship label for EMI, has filed suit against “used” music site ReDigi for copyright infringement. ReDigi, which claims to be a legitimate service for reselling music tracks, works by having users upload legally-purchased music files to their service and then reselling them for a reduced price. ReDigi believes that this is protected under the right of first sale, which permits the reselling of copyrighted works so long as new copies aren’t produced. However, Capitol Records claims that the right of first sale doesn’t apply in this case as ReDigi must make a copy of the song to download it to the buyer’s computer. Capitol Records is seeking both an injunction and statutory damages.

2: Mystery Buyer Wins Auction for Copyright Troll’s Domain

Next up today, the controversial company Righthaven has had its domain auctioned off to an anonymous bidder for $3,300. The domain was put up for sale to pay for the legal expenses of a former defendant sued by the company, which previously was famous for its no-warning lawsuits over content from the Las Vegas Review-Journal and the Denver Post but has since stopped after a string of legal defeats. The money from the sale will go to pay the legal bills of Wayne Hoen, who successfully defended himself against a Righthaven lawsuit and is now owed over $60,000 in legal bills from Righthaven.

3: Microsoft Sues China’s Gome for Alleged Copyright Infringement

Finally today, Microsoft has sued Gome Electrical Appliances Holding, one of China’s largest electronics distributors, and a Beijing electronics mall over copyright infringement. At issue is Gome’s alleged inclusion of pirated copies of Windows in computers it sells. The mall was sued over lack of supervision and oversight in the sale of those computers. The move comes as Microsoft is struggling to gain traction in China which, despite a booming tech sector, has also been a haven for piracy, due in large part to relaxed enforcement.

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: New Lawsuit Means All Major Labels Are Suing Grooveshark

First off today, EMI, the fourth and smallest of the “big four” record labels, has filed suit against music streaming service Grooveshark for breach of contract. Grooveshark, which was already being sued by the other three labels (Universal, Warner and Sony) had struck a deal to license EMI’s music through their service. However, according to EMI, Grooveshark has not paid any royalties nor have they issued any accounting statements. Grooveshark has said that this is a “contract dispute” that they hope to have resolved soon.

2: For Americans, Digital Piracy is a Family Thing

Next up today, a study by the American Assembly, which is affiliated with Columbia University, found that three quarters of Americans surveyed believed that sharing music with family members was acceptable and that more than half felt the same about sharing with friends. However, only 16 percent thought it was acceptable to share in a widespread manner for commercial gain. Respondents were split almost evenly on punishments for file downloading with a little under half saying there should be none. Those who did favor punishments favored lighter ones such as warnings and small fines.

3: Is Copyright Against Your Religion?

Finally today, in Sweden the government has officially recognized Kopimism as an official religion. Kopimism, which was founded by 19-year-old philosophy student Isaac Gerson, believes that “the sharing of information is the most beautiful thing in the world”, including file sharing. However, the move is unlikely to have any practical impact as it does nothing to make file sharing legal. However, the movement has drawn a lot of attention to the Church of Kopimism’s site, which is currently accepting new follower registrations via a form.

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 may be the holidays but that doesn’t mean things are slowing down in copyright news. Not only is SOPA and it’s new alternative still making headlines, but new DRM rules are on the horizon and we even have a major court ruling in a case against an advertiser.

We also have a case of a fair use ruling making strange bedfellows and a conclusion to the Vostu/Zynga case just in time for Zynga’s upcoming IPO.

Those stories and many more are in this week’s edition of the Copyright 2.0 Show!

This week’s stories include:

• SOPA Opponents Introduce Alternative Legislation, now Called OPEN Act
• EFF to Ask Copyright Office to Legalize Jailbreaking on Tablets, Consoles and More
• Chitika Not Liable for Serving Ads on Pirate Site, May Have Been if Informed
• Publishers, Record Labels Join Righthaven Fair Use Fight
• Vostu Settles w/ Zynga, Will Change Games
• 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: Lawmakers Propose Alternative to Stop Online Piracy Act

First off today, U.S. lawmakers have created a draft proposal for new legislation that would provide an alternative to the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and would remove the Internet filtering rules altogether. SOPA, which has become controversial in recent week, sparking protests online, would enable copyright holders to get simple court orders to force ISPs to block access to overseas sites dedicated to the purpose of infringement. The new bill would remove that provision and require rightsholders to go through the International Trade Commission (ITC) in order to order 3rd parties to cease doing business with the site. This would mean copyright holders follow a similar process to patent holders and that the investigations would be made public. The draft proposal has the support of several opponents to SOPA, including Senator Ron Wyden, who has threatened to filibuster the bill if it reaches the Senate and has put a block on SOPA’s sister legislation, PROTECT-IP.

2: Jolie’s Directorial Debut Named in a Copyright Lawsuit

Next up today, star Angelina Jolie is making her directoral debut but the movie has found itself mired in a copyright lawsuit. Author and journalist James J Braddock has sued Jolie claiming that the story for “In the Land of Blood and Honey”, which she also wrote, is an infringement on reporting he did regarding the Bosnian war. Braddock, who filed the suit in his native Croatia, is asking for damages and to prevent the movie from being distributed. He also named several other defendants in the lawsuit.

3: Piracy Pays for Itself, Swiss Government Says

Finally today, Switzerland has said that it will not seek new legislative solutions regarding piracy claiming that the money consumers save on piracy are later spent on other entertainment expenses. In Switzerland, like many other EU countries, downloading copyrighted material for personal use is legal though distribution is not. The Swiss legislature has said that the evidence is not yet there to to change that, citing that approximately 1 out of every 3 citizens download content.

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.

However, what most people don’t get about piracy enforcement is that it isn’t aimed at the hardcore pirates, the ones who make it a point to never buy copyrighted works. The entertainment industry, despite what many people claim, is filled with smart people on these issues and they realize that the hardcore pirates both can’t be stopped and, if they can, still will not become customers.

Instead, these efforts, often misguidedly in my opinion, are targeted at casual and accidental pirates, the ones who can be swayed to open up their wallets (and routinely are).

Those who choose, for whatever reason, to not pay for copyrighted works remove themselves from consideration. That, unfortunately, causes their opinions to be discarded in many areas, not just which DRM gets chosen for the next game release.

If you want to have a say in the discussion about copyright, you have to vote with your dollars for anyone to listen, it’s a painful truth that needs to be said and understood.

Money and Piracy

The relationship between money and piracy is very complex. Surveys have found that those who pirate content also spend more on it. This makes sense as heavy consumers of media are more likely to both pirate and buy content in large amounts.

Obviously, these are the entertainment industry’s best customers. However, the question remains: How do you ensure that as much of their media is obtained legally? To do this the entertainment industry has tried a two-pronged approach, a combination of copyright enforcement and improving access to legitimate alternatives.

The truth is that most pirates are fairly casual about it. They download illegally out of convenience, cost, habit, etc, and not for ideological reasons. However, there are a few at the extreme end of the piracy spectrum who do pirate for “stronger” reasons and can’t be swayed to stop.

Those who refuse to open their wallets are often the most passionate and vocal online, but they also cut themselves completely out of debate, even as they often try to dominate it.

In Business, Money Talks

The fact is simple, entertainment is a business and, with a business, money talks.

A good example is the Humble Indie Bundle which, despite being available for just a penny (that could have gone to charity), over 25% of the downloads were illegal.

While the Humble Indie Bundle was still a great financial success and several sequels have followed, many projects using traditional models are also great successes. When major players look at the Humble Indie Bundle, they’re going to see many of the same problems they face now and, most likely, decide it isn’t worth the risk.

Businesses, when making large decisions, focus entirely on the bottom line and they follow where the money is going. If you want to see more efforts like the Humble Indie Bundle or Radiohead’s “In Rainbows”, the solution isn’t just to download and enjoy them, but to reward the creators materially as well.

While “freeloaders” can be useful members of a community and generate revenue other ways, such as by promoting a product or brand, if the money isn’t there at some point, then it doesn’t matter what people think or how much they like an approach.

If you want to cast your vote, you have to make the cash register ring.

Bottom Line

Voting with your dollar does not simply mean taking your money away from those you don’t like, it also means supporting those you do. If the industries, lawmakers and other decision-makers don’t believe that you are a potential customer, they won’t seriously consider your opinions on what kinds of entertainment to produce, how to market it, how to sell it and, perhaps most importantly, how it should be protected.

Of course, opening your wallet in this case could mean a lot of different things, including, most notably, viewing ads (rather than skipping/blocking them), but the end result is the same, content creators and those who support them earn a profit.

In the end, if you don’t support the people and business models you like or want to see succeed, your opinion isn’t going to matter. Creators will continue to target those who are paying and ignore you because, in their eyes, you might as well not exist.

But what are the factors that affect infringement? Why is it some rightsholders see almost no infringement and others are overwhelmed? Why do some see a great deal of straightforward piracy but others are plagiarized or spammed more?

There are many factors to consider but here is a quick rundown of seven of the most important ones to consider when trying to figure out what your copyright situation might look like.

1. The Medium

The medium of choice will have a great bearing on the type of infringement you see. Those who work in text will likely see more plagiarism (save for eBooks that see more piracy). Those who work in audio and video will see a lot more piracy and other attributed copying. Images tend to see a good bit of both as they are commonly used as clip art without permission or attribution but are also often reposted with credit.

This has more to do with the difficulty and usefulness of plagiarism than anything. Editing out attribution is harder in audio and video and plagiarism has greater benefits with text works (SEO, academic use, etc.) and attribution is much easier to hack off.

2. Popularity

The more popular something is, the more likely it is to be stolen, by humans at least. Though less-popular content will see less piracy and, most likely, less plagiarism, it may still see high levels of automated scraping and other content misuse depending on other factors.

Bear in mind though that popularity can shift in a matter of a moment. In addition to content going “viral” on the Web, Google results can fluctuate wildly and a previously unknown work can be come high-traffic overnight.

3. Target Audience

If you look at the demographics of who is on Bittorrent, you can get an idea of who is doing the most piracy. Typically, that audience tends to skew both young and male. Thus, content targeted at that audience will see more piracy and, likely, other types of infringement as well.

This also explains why some genres of music and movies are more pirated than others.

That being said, older audiences are often less aware of copyright and often engage in accidental infringement. Younger audiences are also more likely, in general, to plagiarize though there are few absolutes in that area.

4. Cost

This one should be obvious, but the more expensive you make a product, the more it is going to be pirated, at least compared to other works with a similar audience.

The smaller audience will ensure that it is plagiarized less, but the temptation to share a work or posted illegal copies online will be greater as there will be more people who want it but can’t afford it. Thus, the “reward” for piracy is much higher as the price tag on the work goes up.

5. Ease of Access

The harder you make it to access a work legally, the more likely it is others will try to take illegal shortcuts to obtain it. While cost is a part of this, it’s only a small element, the bigger question is whether or not the work is where the potential users want it.

For example, a movie available on Netflix streaming will likely see less piracy than one that isn’t, all other factors being equal. The more barriers that a rightsholder puts up to getting a work legally, the more tempting piracy becomes.

However, barriers do seem to reduce plagiarism as that most plagiarists stick only to works they can access quickly and there is no shortage of them.

6. Licensing

There’s a huge debate as to how licensing affects infringement. Many believe that using open licensing, such as Creative Commons, reduces infringement by giving users a legitimate way to do what they want with the content. Others, however, believe that the licensing causes confusion and leads to the mistaken belief their is no copyright.

In my experience, clear licensing that gives a good path to legitimate use can and does reduce infringement in most cases. However, the problem is that sometimes this strategy increases availability and, to a degree, popularity of a work increasing piracy in the long run. It’s a give and take.

However, generally speaking, the clearer the licensing, the less piracy and infringement there is.

7. Copyright Enforcement

Effective, well-targeted copyright enforcement can reduce the amount of piracy and plagiarism. However, it can’t stop it outright and it works better on works that are seeing only a moderate amount of infringement as it is possible to wipe out a large percentage of the access points.

As such, it’s only effective when applied well and in conjunction with other methods of reducing infringement.

Bottom Line

The problem with this list isn’t identifying the factors which can affect infringement, of which this is just some, but rather, weighing them properly. Popularity and target audience seem to be the “heaviest” factors in determining the amount of infringement though media type is the biggest at determining the types of infringement one sees.

However, once again, as with all things, the weight and the importance of each factor often fluctuate wildly between different types of content creators. For some, their genre has more to do with their level of infringement than their relative popularity. Others are so popular their genre almost does not matter at all.

That being said, almost every work out there will have a few factors that encourage at least some kind of infringement. That’s why it’s important to remember that these are relative to each other, meaning that there is a relative increase or decrease in copyright issues, not an absolute guide as to who will be bit the most or the least.

Still, if you take a look at these factors and analyze honestly how they apply to you. You’ll likely understand roughly how much and what kind of infringement to expect in the long run and how that situation will change as your situation shifts.

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

1: House Hearing on Stop Online Piracy Act Scheduled

First off today, the U.S. House of Representatives has scheduled a hearing on the controversial Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). The bill would allow rightsholders to get court orders to order ISPs and search engines to block access to “rogue” sites dedicated almost solely to piracy and also force payment processors and advertisers to stop doing business with such sites as well. The hearing will be at 10 AM ET Wednesday in Room 2141 of the Rayburn House Office Building and, most likely, will be webcast. An online protest, entitled American Censorship Day, is being planned for the same day in a bid to target the hearing.

2: RIAA: Google Refused to Remove MP3 Download App

Next up today, according to industry insiders, Google has refused to remove an app from the Android App store entitled “MP3 Music Download Pro” even though, according to labels, the app is widely used for copyright infringement. Google has removed similar apps in the past but has seemingly refused to remove this one saying that it has significant legitimate use. The controversy comes as Google prepares to announce the launch its own music store on the Wednesday of this month.

3: “Shoot the Pirate” Copyright Campaign Descends Into Real Violence

Finally today, in South Africa, the Creative Workers Union of South Africa is warning that their recent anti-piracy campaign is getting out of hand. According to the group, which represents tv and music industry members, claims that their “Shoot the Pirate” campaign has led to real-life violence against street vendors selling pirated goods. At least two brawls have erupted between vendors, artists and the police, resulting in at least two arrests and one injury. Others involved in the campaign have reported receiving death threats and one label boss claims to have hired bodyguards.

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: Megaupload Settles Copyright Suit With Porn Studio

First off today, file hosting site Megaupload has settled its ongoing case with pornography company Perfect 10. The details of the settlement were not announced but both sides, in a joint request, asked the judge to vacate and earlier victory for Perfect 10. Perfect 10 sued MegaUpload claiming that the site enabled and encrouaged users to illegally share their content. However, the case despite early victories for Perfect 10, the case had started to go bad for the company with the judge hinting that Megaupload had no obligation to hunt down suspected pirates. However, this may not be the end of Megaupload’s worries as the RIAA listed Megaupload as a company that profits from piracy in a report to the United States Trade Representative.

2: Piracy May Boost Sales, Judge Concludes

Next up today, a Spanish judge, in a case dealing with it pirated physical goods, says that it is impossible to prove how much harm the piracy caused the original copyright holder and that, in many cases, piracy may actually help sales by introducing people to new work. As such, he denied the copyright holder in that case compensation. Spanish law, however, works very differently from U.S. law where damages do not have to be proved in such cases as statutory damages apply and can range from $750 to $150,000 per infringement.

3: Copyright Industries Provided $931 Billion to U.S. Economy in 2010, According to Study

Finally today, a new study from the International Intellectual Property Alliance found that the U.S. Copyright industries added some $931 billion to the U.S. economy, or about 6.4% of the entire nation’s GDP. According to the study, some 10.6 million Americans have jobs that depend on the copyright industries, including some 5.1 million who are directly employed. Even more interesting is that the industries outperformed the U.S. economy during the recession, growing at a rate of 1.1% where the economy grew on .5% from 2007 to 2010.

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: Judge Suggests DMCA Allows DVD Ripping if You Own the DVD

First off today, a judge has tossed a lawsuit against UCLA filed by Ambrose Video Publishing. The lawsuit claimed that UCLA’s ripping of DVDs for the purpose of streaming movies to students in class (both online and off) was a violation of the DMCA for circumventing the digital locks and a violation of copyright for the streaming. The judge ruled that the educational nature of the use gave UCLA a wide berth in streaming the clips and that, more importantly, since UCLA legally purchased the DVDs its circumvention of the DRM was not a violation. However, given how brief the judge’s mention of the DMCA was, many are wondering if the opinion will stand on appeal if one is filed.

2: Digital Monopolies A Bigger Threat Than Piracy, Says Miramax CEO

Next up today, Miramax CEO, Mike Lang, said in a keynote at the recent MIPCOM Conference that piracy can largely be mitigated by giving customers what they want and that monopolies over media, such as the near-monopoly Apple enjoyes in the music industry, are a much bigger threat to the industry than piracy. He said piracy alone isn’t to blame for the decline in the record industry and that other variables, such as the reduced price of digital media, have had roles as well. He also said the movie industry has learned a great deal from watching the music industry struggle and is working to avoid the same mistakes.

3: Walters Art Museum Removes Copyright Restrictions on 10,000 Images

Finally today, the Walters museum of art in Baltimore has relaunched their site and, along with it, put some 10,000 of their images under a Creative Commons license. The license, CC-NC-SA, allows people to download the works for free, which they offer links for, and reuse them in non-commercial purposes so long as they attribute the use and offer any derivative under the same license. The site upgrade comes from a grant made by the National Endowment for the Arts.

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.