Have any suggestions for the 3 Count? Let me know via Twitter @plagiarismtoday.
First off today, Roy Greenslade at The Guardian reports that The Globe and Mail, Canada’s largest paper, has responded more fully to the allegations of plagiarism surrounding Margaret Wente, saying that they have disciplined her but are keeping the details of their response secret. Controversy began to swirl around Wente after a blogger, Carol Wainio, noticed similarities between a 2009 work of hers and other authors, including verbatim passages that were not properly cited. The paper’s public editor had appended a footnote to the article but took no further action, causing many to claim that the newspaper was not addressing the situation adequately. Wente herself has also responded, saying that she made mistakes in that column but that she is not a serial plagiarist. She also attacked the Wainio, accusing her of turning her site into an “obsessive list of accusations”.
Next up today, Nick Bilton at The New York Times writes that the data collection firm 3Taps has filed a countersuit against Craigslist, which previously filed suit against them for alleged copyright and trademark violations. Previously, 3Taps would use data posted on Craigslist to build other applicaitons, which prompted Craiglist to sue. However, 3Taps is saying that the classified-ad giant is engaging in anti-competitive practices and that “public facts are public property” noting that most of the material they used were non-copyrightable pieces of information. Craigslist has a history of suing companies that try to build on the information posted to its site, including it’s ongoing lawsuit against padmapper, a site that lists places for rent.
Finally today, Joe Flint of the Los Angeles Times reports that the TV networks have received help in their fight against Aereo from an unlikely place, Cablevision. Aereo is a new startup that uses small antennae to stream and record over-the-air broadcasts to customers that wish to access them. The television networks sued, calling it a copyright infringement, but a judge recently denied a request for an injunction citing another ruling where Cablevision prevailed over the TV networks. In that case, Cablevision’s remote DVR service was ruled legal, in part because it allowed customers to do no more than they could with a physical DVR in their home. However, according to a brief filed by Cablevision in the appeal of that injunction, Cablevision won because they pay rebroadcast and retransmission fees, which Aereo does not. Cablevision also took issue with the court’s finding that their remote recording service was similar to Aereo’s which they said functions differently.
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.