Copyright Ownership
March 13, 2012
Copyright Termination Disputes Continue, This Time it’s a Roger Miller Case
Picture of Tootsies Orchid Lounge, a famous Honky Tonk, Courtesy of WikiCommons and Author Kathleen Conklin. This firm has published extensively on the complex area of copyright renewals and termination or assignments. A recent Sixth Circuit case illustrates one strand of that nuanced area of copyright law.
February 28, 2012
Politicians and Music: The Wars Go On
Republican presidential candidate and former speaker of the house Newt Gingrich finds himself facing copyright infringement charges over his campaign’s use of song “Eye of the Tiger,” which is the theme song to the movie “Rocky III.” Photo Courtesy of Felinest, Creative Commons
February 7, 2012
The Obama Administration Keys in on SOPA & PIPA
The Obama administration has officially voiced its opposition toward parts of both the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) as well as the Protect IP Act (PIPA). In the official response of the Obama administration made via the blog from “WhiteHouse.gov,” Victoria Espinel, Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator at Office of Management and Budget, Aneesh Chopra, U.S. Chief Technology Officer, and Howard Schmidt, Special Assistant to the President and Cyber-security Coordinator for National Security Staff stress “that the important task of protecting intellectual property online must not threaten an open and innovative internet.”
February 2, 2012
Will the Supreme Court Review the Ninth Circuit’s Copyright Misuse Decision?
Several weeks ago, Psystar filed certiorari to ask the Supreme Court to review the Ninth Circuit’s analysis of its copyright misuse defense. Psystar is a computer manufacturer that sells computers which use Apple’s operating system software, OS X. In 2009, Apple, Inc., prevailed on a copyright infringement claim against Psystar and also successfully convinced the district court for the Northern District of California that Psystar’s copyright misuse defense should not stand. The district court decided these issues on summary judgment. Psystar did not appeal the district court’s finding of copyright infringement. However, it did appeal the court’s ruling on the copyright misuse issue.
January 18, 2012
Contributory Cybersquatting Liability Exists but Not in Petroliam Nasional Berhad v. GoDaddy
In Petroliam Nasional Berhad v. GoDaddy.com, Inc., Petronas, the national oil company for Malaysia alleged a claim for contributory cybersquatting against GoDaddy, a domain name registrar. Cybersquatting is “the bad faith registration of a domain name that is identical or confusingly similar to another’s distinctive mark.” Domain name registrars act as intermediaries between the party registering the domain name and the registries that maintain a master list of all domain names. They are accredited by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a non-profit organization that manages domain names and Internet Protocol addresses. GoDaddy is required to follow ICANN rules, including “maintain[ing] the status quo during a domain name dispute until receipt of directions from the registrant, an order from a court or arbitral tribunal, or the decision of an administrative panel.” Petronas uses the domain names petronas.com.my and petronastwintowers.com.my. Registrant Heiko Schoenekess registered the domain names petronastower.net and petronastowers.net using GoDaddy. He also used GoDaddy’s “dashboard” interface to forward internet traffic from these two websites to the same porn website.
December 9, 2011
Priorities and Special Projects of the Copyright Office for the Next Two Years
The U.S. Copyright Office just released its priorities and special protects for the next two years in the areas of policy and administrative law. Some highlights are: Treatment of Pre-1972 Sound Recordings, Mass Book Digitization and Rogue Websites.
December 4, 2011
Sam Francis Files Class Action Suit against Art Galleries under California’s Resale Royalty Act
In 1976, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law the Resale Royalty Act, which allows artists to profit from the resale of their visual works in secondary markets. According to the statute, if the artist is a U.S. citizen or California resident for at least two years at the time of resale, if either the seller resides in California or the sale is held in California, and if the work is valued at over $1000, then the artist is entitled to a 5% royalty of the sale price. If the sale price depreciates in value, the artist is owned nothing. When a reseller cannot locate the artist, it is required to transfer the royalty payment to California’s Art Council. The concept that artists should profit from the appreciation of their visual works is called droit de suite, which was borrowed from French law and adopted into the European Union. California is the only state to recognize resale royalties to visual artists.
November 29, 2011
UMG will Continue to Defend Its Accounting Methods in Recording Artists’ Class Action Suit
Rick James, named plaintiff in a class action suit against UMG Recordings, convinced a court in the Northern District of California to deny UMG’s motion to dismiss. James claimed that UMG violated California’s Business & Professions Code Section 17200 which prohibits unfair competition, or “unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business act[s] or practice[s].” Specifically, James contended that companies like Apple/iTunes, Liquid Digital Media, and Rhapsody Music, have entered into licensing agreements with UMG which allow them to distribute and sell musical tracks from UMG’s catalog. However, UMG “improperly characterize[ed]” these agreements as resale agreements. Resale agreements entitle artists to a smaller percentage of income as compared to licensing agreements.
November 24, 2011
Ebay Sued Under the California Resale Royalties Act
The California Resale Royalties Act, codified in the California Code at § 986, provides that if certain conditions are met, an artist is entitled to receive 5% in royalties from a seller’s total purchase price. The artist is entitled to 5% in royalty payments if, at the time of sale: the artist is a U.S. citizen or a California resident for two years; the seller resides in California or the sale takes place in California; the artwork is an original drawing, painting, or sculpture, the work is sold by the seller for more than what he or she paid; the work is sold for more than $1,000; and the work is resold during the artist’s lifetime or within 20 years of the artist’s death. The burden is on the seller to locate the artist and pay the royalties.
October 25, 2011
The Second Circuit Hears Viacom and YouTube Battle-Out the Meaning of the DMCA’s “Knowledge” Requirement in Oral Argument
Viacom, a major media conglomerate including Paramount Pictures, BET Networks, and MTV Networks, sued YouTube for copyright infringement of Viacom’s content. The district court found that YouTube had no liability for the infringing works posted on its site despite its “general awareness” and “welcome[ing]” of them. The district court granted summary judgment for YouTube and its owner, Google, because of a safe harbor provision in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Viacom appealed the district court decision granting summary judgment for YouTube and Google. Viacom argued that internal YouTube documents showed its culpability. For example, in an internal email YouTube stated if YouTube “‘just remove[d] the obviously copyright infringing stuff,’ traffic would ‘go from 100,000 views a day down to about 20,000 views or maybe even lower.’”
Share This Page With Your Phone!
RSS
Newsletter
Facebook
LinkedIn
Twitter
