Have any suggestions for the 3 Count? Let me know via Twitter @plagiarismtoday.
First off today, Enigmax at Torrentfreak writes that Australian ISP iiNet has walked out of talks with major copyright holders saying that the demands of copyright holders are too high and they can’t work with rightsholders until they make content freely available at a reasonable price on the Web.
The negotiations were being spurred forward by the Attorney General, which hoped that the two sides could reach an agreement without the need for new legislation. They had been working to find a way to implement a copyright alert system, similar to the one in France, New Zealand and coming soon to the US.
In particular iiNet has declined to hold on to additional customer data saying that it is not their responsibility and is inappropriate.
Next up today, Jon Russell at The Next Web writes that Google has agreed to a strategic partnership with Japan PEN, one of Japan’s top writers’ associations. The two have agreed to both work to translate Japanese literature in to other languages and inform Japanese authors of their writes related to Google Book Search.
Japan PEN had long been a critic of Google Book Search, though it had not gone as far as to sue Google, as has happened in other nations. The partnership aims to let authors know that they can opt out of Google Book Search if they wish and aid in the process.
The deal will also have Google helping Japan PEN translate books into international languages, most notably English, which has seen very few translations in the past 40 years.
Finally today, Lucy Shaw at The Drinks Business reports that the US wine magazine Palate Press has accused the Canadian wine writer Natalie MacLean of copyright infringement. According to Palate Press, several of their reviews ened up in MacLean’s newsletter, which she charges $2.10 per month for, without attribution or permission.
Other authors also had their works included without permission, including Purple Pages, which joined with Palate Press in demanding that their works be removed. MacLean has said that she is in the process of adding attribution to the previous newsletters, starting with the latest editions and going backward.
None of the reviews were given attribution to the original authors, instead they were accredited to “Vintages Wine Catalogue”, a Liquor Control Board of Ontario publication that routinely runs reviews with permission and attribution, including info on author, date and publication.
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.