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

1: Google Protest of Anti-Piracy Upends Lobbying

First off today, with the SOPA/PIPA “blackout” protests behind them, anti-SOPA advocates are tallying the results. So far, that includes 9 co-sponsors of the bills, including 5 in the Senate and four in the House, that have withdrawn their support for the bills. The two bills, which were being rewritten prior to the protests, would both have allowed copyright holders and the Attorney General to obtain court orders requiring ISPs to block access to “rogue” websites existing primarily for the purpose of copyright infringement. Copyright holders also could have ordered payment processors and advertisers to stop giving money to such sites. The bills are both being redrafted following a rebuke from the White House on the site blocking provisions.

2: Grooveshark Forced Offline in Germany by Copyright Organisation

Next up today, music streaming service Grooveshark has been forced to disable access to German listeners due to a protracted legal fight against the local music rights group GEMA. According to Grooveshark, “disproportionately high operating costs” in the country are forcing the move and the site, in its notice of closure, is asking its users to send a “polite” letter to GEMA over the matter. Grooveshark will continue to serve other countries, including the U.S., where it is being sued by all four of the major record labels over its service. Grooveshark, however, claims to be protected by DMCA safe harbors as the music it streams is uploaded by users.

3: Oracle Offers to Drop Patent Charges Against Google, to Speed Trial

Finally today, Oracle, in a filing made Tuesday in its ongoing case against Google, has offered to put on hold its patent claims if the court will hear its copyright ones more quickly. According to Oracle, Google misappropriated elements of the JAVA language in building their Android operating system, including both patent and copyright violations and is seeking both damages and an injunction against Google. However, disputes and challenges over damage estimates in the patent portion of the case has slowed the case to a halt, thus prompting the move. Google strongly denies the allegations.

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.

The protests seem to be having an impact. Already two key Senators are dropping support of the bills and support for the bills, which once seemed destined for quick passage, has begun to waiver.

However, I voiced my personal opinions on SOPA and the debate around it last month. To recap, I’m not a SOPA/PIPA supporter and have several issues with the laws as written (though they are being rewritten now), however, the debate around it has fallen victim to buzzwords, over-simplification and hype, creating not only a strong opposition movement, but also an environment where engaged and fruitful discussion is impossible.

My fear in all of this wasn’t that SOPA would be defeated (as I said above and wish to repeat, I am NOT a SOPA supporter) but that the heated rhetoric would be used to attack copyright holders (large and small) who take other measures to protect their work.

Fortunately, that doesn’t seem to be happening, at least not on a large scale. To get such a large voice, many staunchly pro-copyright individuals and the vitriol has mostly been targeted at the acts themselves, not used to defend piracy or attack copyright as a larger issue. In fact, many strong SOPA opponents such as Google, which posted to its Public Policy blog, said that “Fighting online piracy is extremely important. We are investing a lot of time and money in that fight,” and other bloggers are pushing to “End Piracy, Not Liberty,” and “Stop piracy, not online freedom,“.

This in turn, gives me a great deal of hope that the conversation, once SOPA and PIPA are past (regardless of the outcomes) that the newly-aware public will be able to start thinking about these difficult issues in a less-polarizing way and, maybe, work together to come up with real solutions that everyone can live with.

With that in mind, I’m proposing 10 questions that the SOPA/PIPA debate raises in hopes, not so much of starting a dialogue here (though it would be nice) but more to get people thinking about the complexities of these issues and what can be done to respect both copyright (as well as other legal issues) and the Web.

10 Questions to Ponder

Note: Bear in mind that many of these questions don’t just apply to copyright law as other areas of law raise similar, equally difficult issues.

1. Given that the Web is truly global, how can one nation enforce its laws effectively when illegal content or services are hosted in another nation, perhaps with different laws?
2. Under what circumstances, if any, should access to a site be blocked on a significant (IE: National) level?
3. If sites are to be blocked (for any reason), what checks and balances should there be to ensure that innocent sites are not targeted? Which authority should have final say on when action should be taken?
4. If sites are to be blocked (for any reason), how should this be done and who should have the responsibility for blocking them? Should ISPs have the burden? Would DNS filtering (as with SOPA) be best or would another method, such as IP filtering, work better? Further, how do we ensure security of the Web while ensuring effectiveness of the block (if effectiveness is possible at all)?
5. What other tools (either in addition to or instead of site blocking) should be used to deal with sites and services that knowingly and deliberately break the law of one country but exist physically in a jurisdiction that, for one reason or another, can not be breached?
6. Specific to copyright, is a “Follow the money” approach more suitable for dealing with websites dedicated to piracy? Such as what is backed in the OPEN act, which was proposed by SOPA opponents as a compromise and is supported by Google.
7. Regarding the “Follow the money” approach, would such a system be effective enough to justify the burden placed on payment processors and the risks of targeting innocent sites/companies?
8. Given that most copyright holders are either small businesses or individuals with limited means. What tools can we provide them, if any, to help them deal with infringement on a global scale while ensuring a free and open Web?
9. What changes, if any, are needed in the core of copyright law (term, rights granted, etc.) to help balance the rights of content creators with the unique environment that is the Web?
10. Finally, what business models should content creators be seeking out to help them unlock the business potential of the Web while minimizing the impact of piracy and how can the law be used to support that? Do any changes need to be made?

Bottom Line

These are, without a doubt, big and difficult questions. Thinking about them and dealing with them involves more than just changing your avatar or blacking out your site. While protesting SOPA/PIPA is fine, doing so without answering the underlying questions it raises (and was designed, in part, to answer) simply opens the door for other, possibly worse, legislation down the road.

Once the blackout is done, perhaps we should use the Web as it was intended, as a means to discuss, share ideas and solve problems.

On that note, if I missed any questions, please leave a comment and I’ll add it to the post. I want this to be a forum for conversation on this topic, including all of the tough questions that, as of yet, have not been answered.

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

1: Web Protests Piracy Bills, and 2 Senators Change Course

First off, today marks the day of the scheduled protests against the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA) as several major websites, including Reddit and Wikipedia, have turned their sites dark for all or part of the day. In face of the protests, two key Senators, Marco Rubio of Florida and John Cornyn of Texas have announced they are dropping their support for both bills. Rubio, a former sponsor of PIPA. The two bills would allow copyright holders to get court orders forcing ISPs to block access to certain “rogue” websites and also require, advertisers and payment processors to cut off funds to such companies. Opponents, however, feel that the legislation could be misused to shut down almost any website and censor free speech.

2: Supreme Court Backs Copyrights for Foreign Works

Next up today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in that a Congress has the right to take works that were once in the public domain in the U.S. and put them back under copyright protection. The lawsuit stemmed from a challenge to the Uruguay Round Agreements Act of 1994, which extended copyright protection to a variety of foreign works that previously did not have it as their countries had no existing copyright relationship with the U.S. That changed, however, after the U.S. became a signatory to the Berne Convention and the Uruguay Round of negotiations. According to the court, Congress acted in the “best interest” of the country with the bill and, with a 6-2 vote, upheld its right to apply copyright protection to public domain works. The challenge was brought by a group of orchestra conductors, performers and educators but was also backed by Google.

3: German State Says Publication of ‘Mein Kampf’ Excerpts Might Violate its Copyright on Book

Finally today, the German state of Bavaria has said that a plan by a UK publisher to print three 16-page segments of Adolf Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” may violate their copyright in the book. The publisher, Peter McGee, plans to publish the segments along with commentary critical of the work. “Mein Kampf”, an anti-semetic trieste was written by Hitler while imprison in Bavaria following the 1923 Beer Hall Putsch. After World War 2, the allies agreed to give the state rights to the work and Bavaria has used those rights to prevent almost all republication of it. However, those rights will expire in 2015, 70 years after Hitler’s death.

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: Wikipedia to Join Web Blackout Protesting SOPA

First off today, Wikipedia has announced that they will be joining Reddit and a slew of other sites in going “dark” on January 18th in opposition to the controversial Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and it’s sister act, Protect IP (PIPA). The 24-hour blackout will affect only the English language version of the online encyclopedia and is designed to protest the acts’ alleged censorship of the Web. However, the move comes as both acts are being rewritten to remove the controversial site blocking provisions and SOPA is currently on hold following a condemnation by the Obama administration.

2: SDT Suspends ACS:Law Founder for Two Years

Next up today, Andrew Crossley, the founder of the controversial UK law firm ACS:Law has been suspended from the practice of law for two years and ordered to pay £76,326.55 in costs at a Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT). The firm rose to prominence, and controversy, in 2009 for its bulk lawsuits against suspected pirates, where it demanded settlements from them to avoid further litigation. Crossley admitted to six of the charges before him, including acting against the best interest of his clients, but contested a seventh, that he had failed to adequately protect client data. The latter charge stemmed from a data leak from his server that resulted in defendant information being leaked on the Web. The tribunal rebutted his claims and found him guilty of that charge as well.

3: Copyright King: Why the “I Have a Dream” Speech Still Isn’t Free

Finally today, as the U.S. celebrated Martin Luther King Jr. day yesterday, many were surprised to learn that they were unable to find a free version of his famous “I Have a Dream” speech. The reason is that the speech itself, which was given 48 years ago, is still protected by copyright and will continue to be until 2038, 70 years after MLK’s death. Currently, EMI records is the company responsible for the licensing of the work though, with EMI’s recent auction, that right will, likely, soon go to another record company.

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: SOPA Bill Won’t Make U.S. a ‘Repressive Regime,’ Democrat Says

First off today, the first hearings in the U.S. House of Representatives on the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) are being countered with a fierce protest that includes a full page ad in the New York Times and many popular websites displaying overlays or turning their sites black. However, Congressmen who support the bill are saying that the fears are overstated and that the bill will not lead to widespread Internet censorship. The bill, which is targeted at “rogue” websites, would allow copyright holders to get court orders to force ISPs to block access to certain sites as well as force search engines, payment processors and advertisers to cease working with them. The hearing is one of the first steps to bringing the bill to the floor of the house for open debate and eventual voting.

2: Costco Prevails in First Sale Case Thanks to Copyright Misuse

Next up today, the case between Costco and Omega watches has taken yet another turn. Omega sued Costco claiming the retailer illegally imported in watches bought cheaper in foreign markets and resold them at a discount in the U.S. When Costco won the first suit, Omega added a copyrighted image to each watch and sued claiming Costco illegally imported a copyrighted work. The district court originally ruled against Omega claiming that Costco had the right to resell legally-purchased copyrighted works but the Appeals court overturned that verdict and the Supreme Court upheld it by taking no action. That sent the case back to the District Court where Costco has prevailed yet again on a summary judgment, this time claiming Omega has been engaged in copyright misuse, meaning Omega attempted to use its copyright monopoly to exert control outside of the element of copyright. The case will likely be appealed, yet again.

3: Artists Call CBS the Chief Copyright Pirate

Finally today, Alkiviades David, the owner of FilmOn.com, has filed another lawsuit against CBS and its subsidiary CNET claiming that the two companies encouraged and enabled file sharing by offering several file sharing applications, including LimeWire, for download on their download.com site and also ran several guides on how to share files online. The lawsuit also lists several hip hop and other artists and Sugar Hill Music as plaintiffs. The lawsuits is Alkiviades second against CBS since the company received an injunction barring FilmOn from rebroadcasting CBS’ over the air transmissions on its service. The first lawsuit, which involved a much smaller collection of works, is still pending.

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: Major File-Sharing Sites Go Dark To Protest Anti-Download Law

First off today, as Spain’s government prepares to debate revisions to its copyright laws that may make it illegal to host a file sharing site, many of the country’s most popular sites protested the laws by replacing their homepages with a black page with a warning that it might be the future of those sites if the law is passed. The law in question, the Sustainable Economy Law, will likely pass today and close a loophole that allowed file sharing sites to operate within the country so long as they meet certain criteria, including not earning a profit.

2: US Gov Spending Millions to Teach Foreign Judges About Copyright

Next up today, the U.S. Government, as well as other nations, will be spending millions of dollars in 2011 to educate judges and other officials about intellectual property law. The money will go to Interpol as well as countries such as Brazil, Mexico, Peru, Philippines that are seeking to crack down on intellectual property issues.

3: DiMA reacts to CRB’s proposals for Internet radio performance royalties

Finally today, in a story that I missed, the Copyright Royalty Board in the U.S. declined to raise royalty rates for Internet streaming sites, despite please from royalty collecting services such as Soundexchange. The Digital Media Association (DiMA), an organization that represents online music streaming services and retailers, applauded the decision citing the more than three-fold increase in royalties from the past three 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.

1: Prosecutors Reduce Charges Against The Pirate Bay

In the much-covered Pirate Bay trial in Sweden, prosecutors have dropped half of the charges, namely the ones pertaining to copyright infringement. The remaining charges focus on whether the site helped to make copyrighted works available.

Though the move is being correctly hailed as a victory for the accused, it is not very surprising considering the nature of bittorrent, where the actual copyrighted works are not hosted on the site. The IFPI has released a statement saying that the move will help the prosecutor by “allowing him to focus on the main issue”.

The prosecutor’s early case was also hampered by technical glitches when a computer expert called as a witness failed to get his presentation working properly. The trial is ongoing.

2: Mob Wars Creator Puts A Hit Out On Zynga, Sues For Copyright Infringement

The makers of the text-based social networking game Mob Wars have sued competitor Zynga for copyright infringement after they released a similar gamed entitled “Mafia Wars”.

Though little is known about the suit at this time, Mob Wars is rumored to bring in over $1 million per month and is one of the most popular games on Facebook. Whether it will be able to sustain a claim of copyright infringement, however, remains to be seen.

3: The New Zealand Internet Blackout

Finally today, a new campaign across Twitter and various social networking sites is aimed at protesting New Zealand’s ‘Section 92A’ law, which will disconnect alleged file sharers in the event that they receive enough complaints against them from copyright holders. The protest works by having users “black out” their avatars, replacing them with a simple black square.

Though initial drafts of the law did open the door for a “one strike” approach, something that was very controversial for obvious reasons, recent drafts of how the process would work have fleshed out a more “three-strikes” approach with much more narrow uses.

Suggestions

That’s it for the three count today, we’ll 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 Saturday morning for the live recording of the Copyright 2.0 Show or wait and get the edited version Monday morning right here on Plagiarism Today.