Have any suggestions for the 3 Count? Let me know via Twitter @plagiarismtoday.
First off today, Chris Kanaracus at PC World reports that Oracle is continuing to target the practices of Rimini Street, a company that provides service and support for Oracle products, despite the fact that Rimini Street claims it has changed its way since a February judgment against it.
Oracle sued Rimini Street claiming that the company made illegal copies of Oracle Software as part of its support business. In February, the judge agreed with Oracle and issued a judgment against Rimini Street. However, Oracle is now claiming that the company’s practices remain “suspect” and that they haven’t changed adequately to avoid being infringing.
Rimini Street, however, is seeking a declaratory judgment that it has not infringed since February. Meanwhile, Oracle has noted that it may sue Rimini Street again for infringements that it things took place after the February judgment.
Next up today, Jeff John Roberts at GigaOm reports that Getty Images is claimed to have backed away from its controversial copyright enforcement tactics in favor of a softer approach that treats infringers as if they were potential customers who made a mistake.
Getty has long drawn criticism for strong copyright enforcement tactics where they have used automated detection tools to locate unlicensed uses of the images they license and send settlement demand letters over commercial uses, demanding hundreds or thousands of dollars per infringement. Getty now claims to have abandoned its attempts to collect penalties and, instead, only seeks a license fee, save when there is a severe commercial piracy.
However, several recipients of recent letters say that the tactics have not changed significantly, that the license fees are still in the hundreds of dollars and feel like an “extortion” fee.
Finally today, Andrew Colley at itNews reports that Voltage Pictures, the company behind the film Dallas Buyers Club, has filed a federal court application in Australia demanding that the local ISP iiNet turn over the identities of individuals it suspects of infringing the film online.
iiNet, in a blog post, says that it has concerns about how the information will be used. While it acknowledges that it’s reasonable for copyright holders to request such info of potential infringers, its says that Voltage does not use the information in a fair manner and uses it primarily to extort small settlements from the infringers, who are unable or afraid to go to court.
iiNet previously won a protracted legal battle with Hollywood studios, which tried to hold the ISP liable for infringement by its customers. There is no word if other ISPs in the country are cooperating with Voltage Pictures’ requests.
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.