Have any suggestions for the 3 Count? Let me know via Twitter @plagiarismtoday.
First off today, Rob Kidd at the New Zealand Herald reports that the Kim Dotcom extradition hearing is continuing with the Crown prosecutors highlighting that Kim Dotcom paid an estimated $3 million to suspected pirates, including $50,000 that was paid to one user who had received more than 1,200 takedown notices.
Dotcom, along with many alleged co-conspirators, were arrested in January 2012 and their then-site, Megaupload, was shuttered. Dotcom, who lives in New Zealand, faces extradition to the United States on charges of criminal copyright infringement, money laundering and fraud. Dotcom, however, has contested the charges and due to delays the hearing only began last week.
The crown is currently presenting its case, arguing that Dotcom knowingly paid millions to users who uploaded pirated content so he could attract more visitors to his site. Dotcom has claimed he didn’t handle day-to-day affairs of the site but the Crown showed he received detailed weekly updates about the site and its progress. The hearing is schedule to last three more weeks.
Next up today, Any Malt at Complete Music Update reports that two of the three major record labels have scored a win against VKontakte, a Russian social network, with a judge ordering the site to do more to block the uploading of infringing music.
The lawsuit began last year when all three of the record labels filed suit against VK, alleging that the site does not do enough to stop piracy. Sony Music settled their case separately in July but the other two are continuing with the judge issuing an oral decision that the site must use technological solutions to prevent pirated works from being reuploaded.
VK has, in the past, said that it is planning to launch better copyright enforcement systems but the record labels say that the promises have never come to fruition.
Finally today, Jeff John Roberts at Fortune reports that the myth of the Facebook copyright notice is making its rounds again as countless users post various “copyright statements” to their wall in hopes of retaining control of the content they post on the site.
The notice first popped up in 2012 but was quickly debunked. Facebook users agree to a terms of service, which is just as binding as any other contract. It can not be changed unilaterally, including by posting on Facebook itself.
It is not known why the “copyright meme” has made a return but it is still just as ineffective. Facebook’s license to your content is governed solely by the site’s terms of service and not by what you post to your timeline. So please stop doing it.
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.