Copyright 2.0 Show – Episode 293 – Late Entrant


japan-299-sizedIt is Friday again and that means that it is time for another episode of the Copyright 2.0 Show.

As we approach the hottest part of the summer, copyright news itself starts to heat up as we have the latest move by Vimeo in its case against Vivendi, Aimee Mann files a potentially disrputive lawsuit in the world of streaming media and both Woody Allen and Elton John successfully defend their work.

Internationally though, things are also getting tense as Japan becomes a late entrant to the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations and crowdsourced copyright legislation will get a vote in Finland.

All of this and one bizarre attempt to rid the Web of an unfortunate viral video, on this week’s edition of the Copyright 2.0 Show!

This week’s stories include:

  • Vimeo Seeks Dismissal of Vivendi Lawsuit
  • Aimee Mann Sues Over Streaming Music Rights
  • Woody Allen Wins Fair Use Case
  • Court Upholds Originality of Elton John’s “Nikita”
  • Japan Joins TPP Talks, During Round 18
  • San Francisco TV Station Uses DMCAs To Remove Embarrassing Video

You can download the MP3 file here (1:06:28, 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 and a personal blog at



Want to Republish this Article? Request Free Permission Here. It's Free.


  1. I have a question, and it’s going to sound pretty stupid, but I don’t know the answer to it so I’m asking anyway.

    How come Patrick can’t include a Martin Luther King quote in a written work but he can say it verbatim on the PT podcast? What’s the difference between writing it out and saying it and having it digitally recorded?

    • That’s actually a very, very good question.

      The reason is I feel comfortable that it is a fair use and that the likelihood of being sued is effectively nil. The rules Patrick’s publisher imposted on him aren’t actually based on the law, but were rules they created to make sure they are compliant with the law.

      Think of it this way. A transportation company might set up a rule for its drivers where they can never make a right turn on red. Though it’s often legal, it’s an easier rule to follow than to try and decipher the various laws in cities and states across the nation. In short, it’s sometimes legal to turn on red, but it’s pretty much always legal to not turn on red.

      In the publisher’s case, their rule is easier for them and easier for authors. The publisher plays it safe even when uses that are longer often clear cases of fair use, such as Patrick’s.

      In short, the rule that prevent Patrick from using in the book was the publisher’s, not the law’s and I don’t play by their rules man…