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

1: Poland Set to Sign Copyright Treaty, Despite Protests

First off today, Poland has announced that it plans to go ahead with its schedule signing of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) despite protests and even denial of service attacks against many of its key government sites. The treaty, which primarily targets counterfeit goods but also deals with some copyright issues, is designed to harmonize criminal and civil enfrocement across signing countries. According to government representatives, the treaty does not require any changes in existing Polish law and, as such, there is no reason to delay signing past Thursday’s planned ceremony. Anonymous, who is behind many of the attacks, has threatened to release government documents if the treaty is signed.

2: ‘Agneepath’ in copyright tussle!

Next up today, in India, the upcoming release of the movie Agneepath may be moving forward without one of its most-anticipated songs. A lawsuit filed by Aditya Salankar claims that the song “Oh Saiyya” is a direct copy of a song he composed and is seeking to halt the use of the song in the film as well as additional damages. The movie, which is a remake of a popular Hindi film from 1990, has been widely anticipated in the country.

3: Supreme Court Decision on Copyright May Not Injure Major Opera Companies, Symphonies

Finally today, according to a report on a St. Louis-area opera company, the recent Supreme Court ruling in the case Golan v. Holder will not have a drastic impact on opera and symphony performances. The case found that Congress acted constitutionally when it passed the Uruguay Round Agreement Act and re-copyrighted a series of works previously in the public domain. The case was brought by a group of librarians, performers and others who depended on public domain works for their living. However, according to at least one opera house, the difference the ruling will cause will, most likely, add some costs but “not substantially” adding that they have never chosen which opera to perform based on whether royalties are owed or not.

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

This episode of the Copyright 2.0 Show was something of a special one. It was recorded on January 18th, in the middle of the SOPA “blackout” protests and, as part of it, we have a very long conversation on the Stop Online Piracy Act as well as the protests and the effect that they were having at that point.

However, there was no rest for us as we also had to make room for a slew of other copyright news including an important Supreme Court decision, a copyright controversy around “Mein Kampf” in Germany and one major video game developer backing down from their pirate hunt.

And that’s just the beginning!

This week’s stories include:

• SOPA Protests Black Out Web, Turn Legislators
• Supreme Court Approves Re-Copyrighting Public Domain Works
• “Mein Kampf” to be Republished in Part, in Germany Against Rightsholder Wishes
• CD Projekt RED Stops Hunting for Pirates
• ACS:Law Founder Suspended From Practicing Law
• Warhol Foundation and Velvet Underground Square Off Over Banana Image

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: 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.

A bit part of that celebration comes from the music we listen to. From timeless Christmas classics to the more modern adaptations, music has always been a big part of the holidays and will be for a long time to come.

But how much of that near-ubiquitous Christmas music is in the public domain and how much is still earning their authors (or their estates) money? It’s a surprisingly tough question as much of the Christmas music we listen to is actually not anywhere near as old as we think.

To illustrate that point, here are five tracks that are currently in the public domain and five songs that, as of right now, are not. Please bear in mind that this only pertains to the composition of the work and that various performances of it may still be protected.

So, without any further ado, here’s the list of some of the surprises when it comes to Christmas copyright.

Public Domain – Deck the Halls

“Deck the Halls” is a secular holiday song that originates from the 1800s. The meolody belongs Welsch composer Nos Galan. The lyrics, as they are sung today, are actually American in origin and date back to the 19th century.

All in all, this song has been in the public domain for hundreds of years.

NOT Public Domain – Frosty the Snowman

“Frosty the Snowman” dates back to only 1950 and was the creation of songwriters Jack Nelson and Steve Rollins who, seeing the success of Rudolf the Red-Nosed Reindeer a year earlier (spoiler alert, Rudolf isn’t public domain either) and decided to take a stab at creating their own Christmas Carol.

They succeeded and “Frosty the Snowman” remains one of the most popular and most-licensed holiday songs year after year.

Public Domain – Jingle Bells

“Jingle Bells”, which was originally titled “One Horse Open Sleigh” was the work of author James Lord Pierpont in 1857. It was originally intended to be for a Thanksgiving event at a church in Savannah, GA but was so popular it was played at Christmas and grew to become one of the most popular Christmas carols of all time.

However, it’s long-since fallen out of copyright and is available to be freely copied and performed.

NOT Public Domain – Santa Claus is Coming to Town

On the other hand, you better watch out, you better not cry, you better not pout I’m telling you why: “Santa Claus is Coming to Town” is under copyright and you might get sued!

Kidding aside, the song was written in 1932 by John Frederick Coots and Haven Gillespies. The song was first performed by Eddie Cantor on his radio show, instantly making the song a huge success. However, even though it’s nearing the end of its copyright term, it hasn’t lapsed yet and is still vigorously protected.

Public Domain – Silent Night

There seems to be a lot of debate about just how “Silent Night” was first written, however, most seem to agree that it was penned on or around 1818 in Austria. The original (German) lyrics were penned by Reverend Joseph Mohr and Franz Gruber penned the music.

The song and it’s later English translations have long since lapsed into the public domain.

NOT Public Domain – Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas

“Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas” was written in 1944 by composer Hugh Martin for the MGM movie “Meet me in St. Louis”. First sung by Judy Garland, the song became a hit. However, the original tone of the song was meant to be somber, sung by a destitute family as they’re being thrown out of their St. Louis home.

Frank Sinatra further popularized the song in the 1950s, with some lyrical tweaks, further catapulting it in the limelight.

Public Domain – Toyland

Though “Toyland” is best known today for being in the 1961 Disney Musical “Babes in Toyland”, the song actually written for the original Operetta of the same name, which was written in 1903 by composer Victor Herbert. The lyrics were written by Glen MacDonough.

Though many versions of the song are actually re-writes of the original, the one they date back to has long since lapsed into the public domain.

NOT Public Domain – Little Drummer Boy

“Little Drummer Boy” was written by Katherine K. Davis in 1941 though Henry Onorati and Harry Simeone are also often listed on the credits, though with some controversy in Simeone’s case. The song was based on an old Czech carol and was originally entitled “The Carol of the Drum”.

The first people to perform the song were the Trapp Family Singers, who became famous as the subjects of “The Sound of Music”, even though their version of the song wasn’t very popular. However, Simone rearranged the song in 1958 and changed its title to the modern version, shooting it to success.

Public Domain – O Little Town of Bethlehem

Written as a poem by Episcopal clergyman Phillips Brooks in 1867, two years after he visited Bethlehem. The music was by Lewis Henry Redner from a song named “St. Louis”.

Both the song and the music have long since lapsed into the public domain.

NOT Public Domain – White Christmas

“White Christmas” was originally written by composer Irving Berlin sometime between 1940 and 1942. Berlin, who was working on the movie “Holiday Inn”, had been tasked to write a song for every major U.S. holiday but Berlin, who was Jewish, struggled to write the one for Christmas.

He eventually came up with White Christmas but almost didn’t present it. It was Bing Crosby who convinced him it was a “winner” and the song has gone on to be the biggest-selling single in history, with over 50 million copies sold.

Bottom Line

On that note, I want to wish everyone a happy holidays. Plagiarism Today is going to be taking some time off for the next week or so. However, I will be around many of those days handling consulting work and last minute details. I’ll also return next week to do my usual year-end wrap ups and other articles.

In the meantime though, have a great, happy and safe holidays and I will see you guys shortly!

Special Thanks: A special thanks to Rightsworkshop and Public Domain Info for their lists that help me get started on this post. Check them out for even more public domain/non-public domain Christmas songs.

For those who know copyright and understand how the law works this phrase has likely caused more headaches and facepalms than just about any other. Even most people who aren’t very knowledgeable about copyright know that copyright affixes to a work upon its creation and that it is automatic (at least in recent decades) with no symbol, notice or registration required.

Yet, the myth persists. The Cook’s Source and the Lara Jade case illustrate, a lot of people who really should know better simply don’t.

But before we dismiss these people as bing daft and foolish for not knowing the laws of their industry, we have to acknowledge that the confusion is actually somewhat understandable. With copyright “public domain” means something very different than it does to a layperson. That makes it so that, when one hears that they are free to copy and reuse anything that’s in the “public domain” they often have the wrong definition of the term and that, in turn, leads to trouble.

But is there a way we can prevent this confusion or at least lessen it? It would be difficult without throwing out a legal term with hundreds of years of significance, but there might be other ways to get around the issue.

Public Domain vs. Public Domain

In copyright, public domain simply means that the work lacks copyright protection. Whether it didn’t qualify for it, such as works created by the Federal government. However, to most lay people the “public domain merely means being “in the public sphere” or “made available to the public”.

With that second definition, it’s easy to see how others might conclude everything on the Web is in the “public domain” because it is in one of the two, just not the one that matters legally.

To be clear, “Public Domain” isn’t the only word with a different definition when used by laypeople. “Theft”, for example, is used much more broadly than the legal definition, which deals only with physical property and money. Also, many people use the word “Assault” when they really mean “Battery” as assault has become a catch-all for being attacked though that’s not the legal definition.

However, normally these distinctions don’t cause someone to get into trouble as the confusion is more semantic than anything. Here, the mistake leads to people believing that a wide swath of works are available for reuse when they are very much under copyright. In short, the layperson definition is almost the opposite of the legal one.

This, in turn, is how teens wind up on the cover of porn DVDs and magazines wind up pilfering articles.

WHile the problem is easy to understand, fixing it is a much larger challenge.

Fixing the Problem

First, the good news: In my experience, though I have no data to back this up, the problem seems with those much older than 40, which is definitely true in the case of the Lara Jade dispute though unconfirmed in the Cooks’ Source case.

This could be because the term “public domain” to mean “in the public” is somewhat archaic to younger people or it could simply be that those born later have had more exposure to the legal definition from an earlier age. While some still confuse the two at any age, it seems to be a bigger problem the higher the age goes.

Also, it is likely that those who have been born more recently have never lived in a copyright climate where things lapse into the (legal) public domain. Those born since 1978 have, with only a few exceptions, never had a work made in their lifetime lapse into the public domain as formality requirements were removed in the Copyright Act of 1976.

Despite all of this, the mistake does happen and explaining the difference between the two definitions of “Public Domain” can be a tedious, losing battle.

Even turning the conversation to ethics doesn’t always work. “Would you want your (attributed) article reprinted without permission or payment in a magazine?” is an ethical question that would likely split a room full of people. Some would be thrilled, others much less so. However, the law is pretty clear.

One approach is to just drop the term “Public Domain” from conversation and use “Copyright Protected” and “Not Copyright Protected” or some variation. However, that would require throwing out the term “Public Domain”, which can be traced back to the mid-19th century.

The problem isn’t the age of the term or how rarely it’s used, it’s the lack of familiarity with it and that, in turn, is caused by the lack of familiarity with copyright law at large. THat’s slowly changing thanks to the copyright issues the Web has raised, but the problem is far from over.

In the end though, copyright education is by far the best tool for defeating this confusion and it does seem to be having an impact, at least until the next Cooks Source case comes along

Bottom Line

One thing I’ve noticed over the six years I’ve run Plagiarism Today is that, for the most part, people are getting smarter about copyright. Though most online discussion about the issue are still littered with some who don’t understand the law, most understand at least the basics correctly and those who are more knowledgeable are listened to. This isn’t true every time, and much of it depends on the community you are looking at, but it seems to be an overall truth.

Hopefully this trend can continue and these types of mistakes will be less and less common. It may be wishful thinking, but I’m reasonably optimistic that if we can reach a widespread understanding of copyright, we can start working out how we want it to look and what we want it to do.

In honor of Halloween, I’m going to highlight twelve of my personal favorite public domain horror movies. I’m not aiming to make this a “best of” list by any stretch, if anything, I”m aiming for variety in styles, subjects and eras. Some of these are classics, some of them are relative unknowns but all are great films (for different reasons).

Bear in mind that these movies are only public domain in the United States, many may be protected by copyright elsewhere. Also, I’m linking each of these to their page on archive.org and Public Domain Torrents if available for easy downloading.

I hope you enjoy these movies and, most importantly, have a happy and safe Halloween!

Night of the Living Dead (1968)

We already talked about this movie in greater detai, but it bears repeating. This is the foundational movie for the modern zombie film. Every film since owes at least something to it and a copyright error caused it to be put in the public domain from day one.

The plot of the movie is straightforward, the recently dead begin to rise and commit grizzly acts of murder on the living while a small group of survivors have to set aside their differences and work together to survive the night in the old farmhouse they took shelter in.

It’s a classic horror movie that holds up very well today.

Download on Archive.org | Download on Public Domain Torrents

The House on Haunted Hill (1959)

An eccentric millionaire named Fredrick Loren and his wife, Annabelle, throw a horror-themed party where they invite five guests to spend the night in a supposedly haunted mansion. Those who do so will be rewarded with $10,000. Though the movie has its share of ghosts and scares, most of the movie focuses on the guests and the betrayals and conspiracies they have going between them.

It’s a chiller of a horror film starring the always-great Vincent Price as Fredrick and directed by B movie giant William Castle. A good, spooky time without too much in the way of gore. Definitely holds up better than the recent remake, even if it can be a bit silly in places.

Download on Archive.org | Download on Public Domain Torrents

Nosferatu (1922)

Another one we already talked about, Nosferatu is probably the earliest surviving vampire film and is shot in the classic German expressionist style that gives everything a very surreal feeling.

A 1922 silent film, Nosferatu largely follows the plot of the original Dracula novel but with many changes, especially of the character names. It’s a creepy and eerie movie that is perfect for putting in the background of your Halloween party as nearly every frame is designed to be chilling in at least one regard.

Download on Archive.org (Not available) | Download on Public Domain Torrents

Carnival of Souls (1962)

When an auto accident causes Mary and her two friends to punge off a bridge and into a river, Mary somehow survives but can’t remember anything about how. She tries to move on with her life, even taking a job as a church organist, but she is constantly haunted by strange happenings and seems to be unable to escape that fateful day.

Carnival of Souls is a much more subtle horror movie than most, relying on creepiness and mystery more than traditional scares a great chiller movie that often springs some great conversation.

Download on Archive.org | Download on Public Domain Torrents

The Satanic Rites of Dracula (1974)

The last of the hammer dracula films to star Christopher Lee as Dracula and Peter Cushing as Van Helsing, The Satanic Rites of Dracula isn’t the best in the series but is a solid one for those who want to see the Lee/Cushing combo.

In the movie, which is set in the 1970s, a cult of devil-worshippers revive Dracula, who is bent on destroying humanity as part of his own death wish. He hatches a plan to use a plague to wipe out humankind and must be stopped by Van Helsing.

Not the greatest movie in the Hammer lineup, but the only on to have lapsed into the public domain and still a great chance to see two incredible actors playing amazing parts.

Download on Archive.org (Not available) | Download on Public Domain Torrents

Dementia 13 (1963)

Dementia 13 centers around the family of an eccentric millionaire widow (what is it with the eccentric millionaires in this list?) who still mourns the death of her daughter, Kathleen, who died long ago in a freak drowning accident. She’s willed her fortune to charity in Kathleen’s name and her living children, who have gathered at the family estate for a bizarre ritual mourning her death, are upset about this.

It’s a tale of murder, intrigue as the ghost of Kathleen seems to haunt the home and grounds, tormenting the family’s matriarch as a spate of murders begin to strike those around the family.

All in all, a great thriller of a movie and one, much like The House on Haunted Hill, that centers more on the characters and their story than traditional scares. Best of all, this is one of the earliest works of Francis Ford Coppola, who went on to produce the Godfather trilogy and Apocalypse now among others great films.

Download on Archive.org | Download on Public Domain Torrents

White Zombie (1932)

If you want to see what zombie movies were like before Night of the Living Dead, this is the textbook example.

White Zombie centers around a young couple, Neil and Madeleine, that are eager to be married. While in Haiti, they plan to get married on the plantation of one Charles Beaumont. However, Beaumont’s hospitality is selfish in nature as he seeks to steal Madeleine for himself and he enlists the aid of voodoo master Murder Legendre, who is played by Bela Lugosi, to turn Madeleine into a zombie.

It’s a tale of voodoo and betrayal. A great example of 1930s horror at its finest.

Download on Archive.org | Download on Public Domain Torrents

Tormented (1960)

Jazz pianist Tom has an argument with an ex girlfriend, Vi, atop a lighthouse. Vi threatens to ruin Tom’s engagement with his current fiance, Meg, but Vi slips and nearly falls into the ocean. Though Tom had an opportunity to save her, he refused to help and watched as Vi was killed by the fall.

At first Tom thought the matter was over but Vi’s vengeful spirit begins to haut him, turning his isolated island community into a living Hell. Tom slowly descends into madness, becoming more and more desperate to save his relationship and keep his life intact.

This movie is a bit more campy than some of the others, using the best special effects available at the time, Vi is a great nemesis to Tom, who is a morally ambiguous but intriguing character caught in an impossible situation.

Download on Archive.org | Download on Public Domain Torrents

Body in the Web or Horrors of Spider Island (1960)

When a group of sexy nightclub dancers crash on a mysterious island when en route to Singapore, they at first think they’ve found paradise after locating a cabin, some food and a source of fresh water. But after the lone male in their group gets bit by a spider and starts to turn into a giant monster, be begins to pick off the members of the group one by one.

Body in the Web, better known as Horrors of Spider Island, is a camp classic meant for stupid, cheesy Halloween fun. Several versions of this film are circulating, including some with the superflous nude scenes cut out, which even makes it fairly family-friendly.

Download on Archive.org | Download on Public Domain Torrents

Jesse James Meets Frankensteins Daughter (1966)

When an armed robbery goes bad, Jesse James and his wounded cohort Hank wind up at the door of Maria and Rudolph, Dr. Frankenstein’s grandchildren (Note: Contrary to the title, Maria is NOT Dr. Frankenstein’s daughter) who intend to use Hank to continue their grandfather’s work. Can Jess James save his good friend and the town from the horrors of Dr. Frankenstein’s descendants?

To be clear, this movie is stupid. WHen there’s an obvious error in the title of the movie, you know you’re in for a stupid but funny good time. This movie is for those who enjoy laughing at their horror movies in the “so bad they’re good” kind of way.

Part western, part horror, completely ridiculous.

Download on Archive.org | Download on Public Domain Torrents

Bottom Line

All in all, no matter what your tastes in horror movies are, there’s probably at least one or two great films out there for you in the public domain. So, if you haven’t secured your Halloween movie watching yet, fire up your browser or your Bittorrent client and download a free, legal movie for your spook night enjoyment.

That is, unless you’re scared…

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

1: U.S. Top Court Rejects Internet Music Download Case

First off today, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear a case regarding Internet downloads, letting a lower court ruling that said Internet downloads were not public performances stand. The suit stemmed from the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP), which sued to have digital downloads declared as public performances so they could collect royalties, potentially in the tens of millions, on digital sales for songwriters and composers. The Appeals Court, however, ruled that downloads don’t meet the criteria for a public performance and the Supreme Court declined to hear the case without comment, letting the ruling stand.

2: Supreme Court to Consider Whether Congress Can Restore Copyright

Next up today, the Supreme Court will hear a case that pits teachers, conductors and other content users against the U.S. government. At issue is whether Congress can take works out of the public domain once they have been placed there. The suit stems from treaties and copyright extensions that removed works from the public domain and placed them under copyright protection again, works including “Peter and the Wolf” and Alfred Hitchcock’s movie “Number 17″. If they win their case, these works could be placed back into the public domain and be eligible for use by all without paying a fee.

3: Mac clone maker may take fight with Apple to Supreme Court

Finally today, Mac clone maker Psystar has announced that they are prepared to take their case to the Supreme Court. Psystar has been involved with litigation over Apple, which sued them claiming that Psystar’s making of Mac clones, computers running Apple’s OSX operating system though not made by Apple, was a violation of Apple’s OSX license. Apple won both in the lower court and on appeal, the courts agreeing that it was a license violation and shooting down Psystar’s claim of copyright abuse, but Psystar’s lawyers say they are prepared to appeal to the Supreme Court if needed.

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: Warner Bros. Wins Key Legal Ruling Impacting All ‘Wizard of Oz’ Remakes

First off today, the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals has filed a ruling that may impact the public domain and, more specifically, Wizard of Oz remakes that are being planned. According to the court, AVELA, a company that specializes in nostalgic merchandise, violated copyright by placing images of characters from the 1939 movie “The Wizard of Oz” on various products. This despite the fact that the original books, written in 1900, have long lapsed into the public domain. According to the court, the visual depictions of the characters, though based on public domain figures, are still protected because the movie itself is still under copyright. This could have a drastic effect on the estimated nine “Oz” remakes in the work, including at least one by Disney.

2: Copyright Troll Righthaven Now Starts Paying Those it Sued

Next up today, Righthaven, the group that has sued over 200 sites for allegedly infringing content from the Las Vegas Review-Journal and the Denver Post, is paying some $3,815 in legal fees to Michael Leon, a defendant it sued but served the wrong paperwork to. However, that case may just be the tip of the iceberg as the law firm that backed Leon has also won at least one other case against Righthaven and is asking for some $34,000 in that case as it had to provide a more robust defense. According to the firm, most of the $3,815 was actually spent on negotiating the amount of legal fees to be paid, which the judge allowed.

3: Trial Set for Fight Over Meditation Copyright

Finally today, the normally peaceful art of meditation is now the center of a very nasty legal dispute as two leaders in the world attempt to resolve a copyright dispute on a particular set of meditation materials. At the center of the dispute is Drunvalo Melchizedek, an expert in Flowers of Life meditation and the former head of Flower of Life Research, an organization he founded. When he resigned Ronald Holt took over and received a license from Mechizdek’s that required his approval before releasing new videos. Holt did so and the two swapped lawsuits claiming breach of contract and copyright infringement. An arbiter has already awarded Mechizdek some $50,000 in damages but was unable to rule on the copyright issues, the matter going before the court now.

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: Twitter Does Not Mean Copyright Free, Court Rules

First off today, photographer Daniel Morel has won a key victory against the wire service the AFP and, along the way, a victory for those who post images on Twitter. The AFP had used one of Morel’s photo of Haiti earthquake in a story. After Morel claimed sued for copyright infringement, the AFP claimed that Morel had relinquished rights in the photo after sharing it on TwitPic. However, the court shot down that argument saying that posting via Twitter is not the same as relinquishing ownership. This paves the way for Morel’s lawsuit to continue and lets other Twitter users breathe a sigh of relief.

2: Porn Purveyors Target 13,000 More Does in P2P Lawsuits

Despite setbacks in late 2010 for other plaintiffs, the porn industry seems to be rolling out more lawsuits than ever with various smaller companies combining to file some 13,000 estimated lawsuits against “Doe” defendants all over the country. A similar lawsuit by the Adult Copyright Group targeting some 7,000 Does was thrown out for lack of enjoinder, meaning that there wasn’t sufficient reason to lump the lawsuits together. However, the new cases are arguing that the act of sharing files via P2P is a cooperative effort deserving of such enjoinder. Without it, all the lawsuits would have to be filed separately, greatly increasing the time and expense.

3: What Could Have Been Entering the Public Domain on January 1, 2011?

Finally today, January 1 marked Public Domain Day, the day in which expiring works lapse into the public domain. However, in the U.S. no works were to lapse into the public domain domain the the Center for the Study of the Public Domain instead ran a list of the titles that would have entered the public domain on January 1 2011 if it had not been for the Copyright Act of 1978. This year those works included “The Lord of the Flies”, “Horton Hears a Who” and “Creature from the Black Lagoon” among many others.

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.

This has kicked off an international incident that has resulted in a back and forth war against the site. First Wikileaks lost its domain and had to move to a Swedish extension, then had issues with its DNS provider pulling out. After that PayPal, Mastercard and Visa all stopped processing donations for the site. This, in turn, has prompted others to lead various other attacks against the companies involved, even if they have sometimes been misguided.

However, at least some have wondered what role copyright plays in this case. Though some of the cables have been about intellectual property, including several that showed U.S. involvement in writing Spain’s draft copyright legislation, no one, yet, has tried to use copyright as a tool to silence the site.

After all, Wikileaks is copying and distributing works of creative authorship. Why has copyright not played a bigger role in the Wikileaks scandal, it seems a logical choice?

The reason is simple, copyright doesn’t have a role in this leak because none of the cables are copyright protected. This is due to a move made by the U.S. Government to protect free speech.

However, it is worth taking a moment to look at this reasoning as it is something that has implications far beyond Wikileaks and other, similar sites.

Though some of the cables

The Largest Public Domain Donor

The law on the matter is very clear, all works created by the U.S. Government are released into the public domain. This means all works created by Federal employees as part of their normal duties are, almost without exception, entered into the public domain.

Since the leaked cables were all written by U.S. employees as part of their job, the law applies directly. It may not have been the material the law was intended to cover, but it clearly does.

Still, there are exceptions to the rule. For example, some autonomous agencies, such as the U.S. Postal Service, may not be considered part of the U.S. Government for this purpose. Also, the government can have copyrights transferred to it, including by purchase.

It is also worth noting that this rule does not apply to state and local governments, which can still hold copyright in their creations, nor does it apply to other countries, which often have copyright protection in their government’s work, such as the UK’s Crown Copyright.

Still, the law is clear in this case, the cables are not protected by copyright and though there may be many other legal issues with copying them and spreading them, an issue that is up for debate, copyright infringement isn’t one of them.

Bottom Line

It’s important to note that the reason this was written into the law was so that copyright could never be used as a vehicle to silence criticism of the government. Though the government has many other legal tools to keep its documents out of public hands, copyright is not one of them.

This is why copyright, beyond what may be in the cables, is not a factor in the WIkileaks case.

Still, it will be interesting to watch the actions that the government does take in this matter as we are learning the ways, as controversial as many of them are, that the government is trying to control and restrict the flow of its content without the aid of copyright law.

That may say more about the future of the Web than anyone ever intended, especially considering that it is likely future legislation, both in the U.S. and abroad, will likely reference this leak and be written with it in mind.