Have any suggestions for the 3 Count? Let me know via Twitter @plagiarismtoday.
First off today, Kory Grow at Rolling Stone reports that musician Taylor swift has found herself in a battle with a New Orleans artist over a social media post Taylor made that the artist claims is a rip off of her work.
According to the artist, Ally Burguieres, on Halloween 2014 Swift posted a fan-made watercolor featuring an image of a fox and some of the lyrics from Swift’s song I Know Places. However, according to Burguieres, the fox is an image she created and sells as well as use it on sign for an art gallery she runs.
Burguieres goes on to say that she attempted to reach out to Swift but her representatives only offered her a low settlement that had to be donated, at least in part, to charity. However, Swift’s team alleges that there was no charity requirement and that the amount offered was well above any reasonable licensing fee. Burguieres took her version of the story public in an open letter that Swift has now responded to.
Next up today, Patrick Frater at Variety reports that proposed copyright legislation in Hong Kong has been stalled as attempts to update the territory’s copyright laws have been met with stronger opposition than expected.
The legislation was scheduled to be debated yesterday but repeated quorum calls and calls for amendments held up the bill. After four hours, the debate was moved until Thursday.
The bill has become highly contentious with proponents saying that current Hong Kong copyright law doesn’t do enough to stop rampant piracy but opponents express concern that the law does not do enough to protect legitimate use of content and want a United States-like fair use system.
Finally today, Claire Reilly at CNet reports that, in Australia, Dallas Buyers Club LLC has had their long-running case dismissed, bringing at least a temporary end to their efforts to target Aussie file sharers.
The company is well known for efforts to threaten suspected file sharers. Their efforts usually involve suing unnamed defendants, forcing ISPs to turn over their identities and then targeting the newly-identified users with offers to settle. However, in Australia the judge refused to allow the company to ask for more than the cost of downloading the film plus expenses, which the company felt was inadequate.
Dallas Buyers Club LLC had sought to expand the damages that it could collect but the judge struck down such efforts. As a result, the judge has said he will dismiss the case in its entirety in February 2016 unless further applications are made.
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.