3 Count: Birkenstopps

Have any suggestions for the 3 Count? Let me know via Twitter @plagiarismtoday.

1: Legal War Between Sony Music & Ultra Music Publishing Escalates With Clash Over Copyrights

First off today, Katie Bain at Billboard reports that the battle between Sony Music Entertainment and Ultra International Music Publishing is heating up, with Ultra accusing Sony of copyright infringement.

Sony filed the lawsuit in December 2022. Sony alleged that Ultra’s use of the “Ultra” name infringed the trademark of Ultra Records, a label that Sony had purchased from its founder, Patrick Moxey. However, Moxey continued to use the name as part of his music publishing business.

Now, Ultra Publishing is accusing Sony of failing to renew licensing agreements, including over 50,000 compositions, and using them without paying proper royalties. Sony, however, says that the lawsuit is simply retaliation for the ongoing trademark dispute. As such, Sony is asking the court to dismiss this portion of the lawsuit.

2: Meta Says it Made Sure Not to Seed Any Pirated Books

Next up today, Ernesto Van der Sar at Torrentfreak writes that Meta, the owners of Facebook and Instagram, have said they did not “seed” gigabytes of pirated content when they downloaded it from the BitTorrent network.

Like many tech companies, Meta is being sued for copyright infringement for using copyright-protected content to train AI systems. However, it was revealed that Meta had downloaded the Books3 collection from BitTorrent. The collection contains millions of pirated books, articles and other written content.

In normal circumstances, when one downloads a file via BitTorrent, they also distribute or “seed” it to others. This added another potential liability to Meta in the case. However, Meta is now claiming they took measures to prevent seeding and only downloaded or “leached” the content.

3: Birkenstocks Are Not Works of Art, Top German Court Rules in Copyright Case

Finally, today, the Agence France-Presse reports that Germamy’s highest court has ruled that Birkenstock sandals do not qualify as art and, as such, are not protected by copyright.

The company wanted to stop various local competitors from making imitations of its iconic footwear. It argued that its sandals were “copyrighted works of applied art” and that the competitors were infringing on its rights.

However, the lower court ruled against Birkenstock, saying it failed to meet that criteria. Now, the Federal Court of Justice has upheld that decision. It is unclear if Birkenstock plans to target these competitors with other forms of intellectual property, most notably trademark protections.

The 3 Count Logo was created by Justin Goff and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License.