The 1709 Blog

Expert Author Showcase: Sheryl Letzgus McGinnis

<div style="text-align: justify;">It sounds like advice you’d hear from a passionate English teacher. You’d be surprised to find out that it actually comes from addiction specialist and Expert Author Sheryl Letzgus McGinnis, who is also the subject of today’s Expert Author Showcase and an advocate of the idea that any good writer should also be an attentive reader.<br />
<br />
Sheryl uses article writing as a way to raise awareness for a variety of topics related to addiction, as well as her published books.<br />
<br />
She has writing credits for three books about addiction. Plus, more recently, she has explored writing fiction in the romance category and has one book of short stories.<br />
<br />
Impact of Addiction<br />
<br />
Sheryl hopes that each article she writes can have a positive impact on peoples’ lives. She says, “Sadly, the drug/addiction pandemic afflicts us all in one way or another. One merely has to go online, turn the TV and radio on or pick up the newspaper, and there is usually always something in the news about this problem.”<br />
<br />
The trouble is that it’s difficult for those suffering from addiction to be open and honest. She says, “Addiction is not something that everyone wants to talk about but so many people clamor to learn more about it. I try to deliver timely and truthful information to help others who are caught in the addiction web.”<br />
<br />
Article writing is one of the primary ways Sheryl’s offers her support. Several online radio shows and local television stations have tapped her to provide her expertise on-air, based on articles she wrote.<br />
<br />
The Power of Reading<br />
<br />
No matter what niche you write in, Sheryl recommends reading as the absolute best way to prepare for your next article. She says, “Read. This is something that my husband and I have championed ever since our own boys were little. You’ll learn so much and then you can pass your knowledge along to others.”<br />
<br />
Because of the vast knowledge she acquires through reading and research, Sheryl rarely ever struggles to come up with content in her articles. So many thoughts pop into her head while she’s writing that she actually sets many of them aside to address in later articles. Usually a few words are enough to hold the thought for later.<br />
<br />
Here are the other highlights from our interview:<br />
<br />
    READ, but also WRITE and STUDY – The English language is a living language and constantly changing, so a good writer must keep up with new words, changes to old words and know how to spell and use proper grammar. Bad spelling grammar can cause the reader to lose stock in what you have to say.<br />
     <br />
    Real Spell Check – Keep a good dictionary or thesaurus on your desk and refer to it often. Or, you can even use an online dictionary. Don’t depend on spell check. Any writer knows that spell check can really trip you up if you depend on it solely. It can help, but it can also steer you wrong.<br />
     <br />
    Be Comfortable With Your Topic – Don’t start out writing about topics you don’t know anything about. That’ll put you on a fast track to frustration. Instead, draw from experience and focus on the topics that you know well.<br />
     <br />
    Ask “What Do Others Want?” – If you’re stuck for a topic, just ask yourself a simple question: “What would other people want to know about my particular niche?” The answers will spill forth and then it’ll be a tough decision to pick out the topic from there.<br />
     <br />
    Review and Revise – Once you get to writing, let it flow and don’t let other things distract you. Then, put the article aside for a while before you review and revise it. Most articles could use a fresh eye before they are submitted.<br />
<br />
Now that you’ve had a chance to meet Sheryl, take a minute to leave a question or comment for her.</div>

Expert Author Showcase: Sheryl Letzgus McGinnis

It sounds like advice you’d hear from a passionate English teacher. You’d be surprised to find out that it actually comes from addiction specialist and Expert Author Sheryl Letzgus McGinnis, who is also the subject of today’s Expert Author Showcase and an advocate of the idea that any good writer sh…

26May2012

Business Blogging - How to Create a Blog That Will Represent You Well and Build Your Online Business

<div style="text-align: justify;">Blogs have been around for several years now. I started blogging in 2005, but by that time there were already people who had been at it for two or three years. I knew I could learn from them and avoid any mistakes that they would be willing to share with those of us who were just getting started.<br />
<br />
Within a few weeks of starting my first blog I signed up for a free account over at Technorati. This is the largest blog directory in the world, and you do something referred to as claiming your blog in order to tell Technorati and the world that you are the author. It is a simple process to claim your blog. They walk you through the steps and it can all be completed with one day.<br />
<br />
You can also search for other blogs on your topic at this site. I learned early on that connecting with other bloggers who were writing about my niche topic would be a very good idea. It gives you new ideas for what to write about, you can refer your readers to each other's sites, and everyone benefits.<br />
<br />
Because your blog is your home on the internet, spend as much time and effort as possible thinking out how you will represent yourself online. Make a schedule of what you will post, how often you will post, and what topics you will cover. It is a great feeling to know that you are the one in charge of your blogging experience. It is completely worth it to spend time learning how and what you should do in order to make your blog the best one you are capable of creating.<br />
<br />
Download a free teleseminar on building your online business by visiting http://www.EbookWritingandMarketingSecrets.com to learn how to write articles, blog, become involved in social networking and learn the technology needed to build a profitable online business.<br />
<br />
Connie Ragen Green has been online since 2005 and teaches people how to build their own online business in record time, offering free teleseminars weekly, as well as online courses in a workshop environment with webinars.<br />
<br />
<br />
</div>

Business Blogging - How to Create a Blog That Will Represent You Well and Build Your Online Business

Blogs have been around for several years now. I started blogging in 2005, but by that time there were already people who had been at it for two or three years. I knew I could learn from them and avoid any mistakes that they would be willing to share with those of us who were just getting started. Wi…

26May2012

Comparing Vitamix Models 5200 and 1709

<div style="text-align: justify;">Are you interested in creating fresh smoothies, soups, sorbets, dressings and sauces at lightning speed?<br />
<br />
Many people today are over-stretched in terms of their time and any time saver is a welcome addition to their overcrowded lives. The Vitamix machine is a wonderful time saver and an opportunity to infuse more healthy foods into your diet.<br />
<br />
Vitamix is made in the USA and is family owned and operated and has been for several generations. The great-granddaughter of the founder of Vitamix is now the President of Vitamix. When you receive your machine, you will receive a recipe book with a wonderful collection of recipes to start your blending journey. You will also receive access to an online book made up of favorite recipe creations by the employees of the Vitamix Corporation.<br />
<br />
I see people looking for what the Vita Mix 5200 best price is currently and I want to point out that the CIA Professional Series from Vitamix is another great model to consider.<br />
<br />
Many people wonder which model of Vitamix is a good one to go with for their needs. I will discuss two of them in this article to help lessen the confusion.<br />
<br />
The 5200 and the 1709 CIA Professional Series are two popular models. Quite frankly, many of the models are very similar to each other, with slight differences.<br />
<br />
Vitamix 1709 CIA Professional Series comes with the following features:<br />
<br />
    Made from durable metal-to-metal to help guarantee long lasting high-quality performance<br />
<br />
    Variable speed control allowing you to adjust to the different tasks at hand-this is a HUGE plus and not available in some of the less expensive models<br />
<br />
    2-plus peak horsepower motor that generates blade-tip speeds to 240 mph<br />
<br />
    64 ounce BPA free jar that creates a powerful vortex that pushes ingredients from the blade back down through the center. This process guarantees very thorough blending that you will just not have with a typical blender.<br />
<br />
    A recipe book with 20 recipes developed by the CIA's (Culinary Institute of America) Master Chefs. All of the Vitamixs from the Professional Series includes this book.<br />
<br />
    In addition there are over 300 recipes from top professional chefs from around the country including Joanne Weir, Michael Symon and Hugh Carpenter.<br />
<br />
    A cooking class DVD and owner's manual is included as well<br />
<br />
    Offered in a variety of colors including black, red, brushed stainless and onyx<br />
<br />
Vitamix 5200<br />
<br />
    Made from durable metal-to-metal to help guarantee long lasting high-quality performance<br />
<br />
    Variable speed control allowing you to adjust to the different tasks at hand-this is a HUGE plus and not available in some of the less expensive models<br />
<br />
    2-plus peak horsepower motor that generates blade-tip speeds to 240 mph<br />
<br />
    64 ounce BPA free jar that creates a powerful vortex that pushes ingredients from the blade back down through the center. This process guarantees very thorough blending that you will just not have with a typical blender.<br />
<br />
    Getting Started Step by Step Recipe Book<br />
<br />
    Offered in Black<br />
<br />
Both Models offer the 64 ounce or 48 ounce jar. I highly recommend the 64 ounce jar. You will find when you are mixing a smoothie or soup, that you want room for ingredients that will serve four people. The 48 ounce does not seem to have enough room if you will be mixing for more than three people. Even if you do not have a family, your friends will want a serving of whatever you're mixing in your Vitamix. Trust me.<br />
<br />
In a nutshell, the main difference between these two models is the recipe book and the color selection. I hope you found this comparison helpful.<br />
<br />
So, when looking for the Vita Mix 5200 best price on the internet, also check out the 1709 model.<br />
<br />
You can visit my website below to find out more about the Vitamix.<br />
<br />
<br />
</div>

Comparing Vitamix Models 5200 and 1709

Are you interested in creating fresh smoothies, soups, sorbets, dressings and sauces at lightning speed? Many people today are over-stretched in terms of their time and any time saver is a welcome addition to their overcrowded lives. The Vitamix machine is a wonderful time saver and an opportunity t…

26May2012

<h3 class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name"> <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2012/05/functionality-of-computer-programs.html">Functionality of computer programs, language, unprotected by copyright, says CJEU</a> </h3><div class="post-header">  </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"> <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8mgsiioD0vsTAzweQjJ94NdmYTIHCWR84VYqOZQ03R5uXLCU8YFDgZ6VEfXwThNzcYD4UovVXY4Eqz0RdKYKvibVmuFCiWXF9y1ebGHBPY8GQY8Tz8G_yqgSzBfZLbjZPJd5Dn7R3zFg/s1600/sasa.jpg" style="clear: right; cssfloat: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="68px" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8mgsiioD0vsTAzweQjJ94NdmYTIHCWR84VYqOZQ03R5uXLCU8YFDgZ6VEfXwThNzcYD4UovVXY4Eqz0RdKYKvibVmuFCiWXF9y1ebGHBPY8GQY8Tz8G_yqgSzBfZLbjZPJd5Dn7R3zFg/s200/sasa.jpg" width="200px" /></a></div>Judgment was given this morning by the Court of Justice of the European Union in <strong><a href="http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=122362&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=127566">Case C-406/10</a><em> </em></strong><em>SAS Institute Inc. v World Programming Ltd, </em>a  reference from the Chancery Division, England and Wales.  There's a  fairly succinct summary of the ruling on the Curia press release page:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq"> "<strong>The functionality of a computer program and the programming language cannot be protected by copyright</strong><br />
<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"> <em>The purchaser of a licence for a program is entitled, as a rule, to  observe, study or test its functioning so as to determine the ideas and  principles which underlie that program</em></div><br />
SAS Institute Inc. has developed the SAS System, an integrated set of  programs which enables users to carry out data processing and analysis  tasks, in particular statistical analysis. The core component of the SAS  System is called Base SAS. It enables users to write and execute  application programs (also known as ‘scripts’) written in the SAS  programming language for data processing.<br />
<br />
World Programming Ltd (WPL) perceived that there was a market demand for  alternative software capable of executing application programs written  in the SAS Language. WPL therefore produced the World Programming System  (WPS). The latter emulates functionalities of the SAS components to a  large extent in that, with a few minor exceptions, WPL attempted to  ensure that the same inputs would produce the same outputs. This would  enable users of the SAS System to run the scripts which they have  developed for use with the SAS System on WPS.<br />
<br />
In order to produce the WPS program, WPL lawfully acquired copies of the  Learning Edition of the SAS System, which were supplied under licences  limiting the rights of the licensee to non-production purposes. WPL used  and studied those programs in order to understand their functioning but  there is nothing to suggest that WPL had access to or copied the source  code of the SAS components.<br />
<br />
SAS Institute brought an action before the High Court in the UK,  accusing WPL of having copied the SAS System manuals and components,  thus infringing its copyright and the terms of the Learning Edition  licence. In that context, the High Court has put questions to the Court  of Justice regarding the scope of the legal protection conferred by EU  law on computer programs and, in particular, whether that protection  extends to programming functionality and language.<br />
<br />
The Court recalls, first, that the Directive on the legal protection of  computer programs1 extends copyright protection to the expression in any  form of an intellectual creation of the author of a computer program2.  However, ideas and principles which underlie any element of a computer  program, including those which underlie its interfaces, are not  protected by copyright under that directive.<br />
<br />
Thus, only the expression of those ideas and principles is protected by  copyright. The object of the protection conferred by Directive 91/250 is  the expression in any form of a computer program, such as the source  code and the object code, which permits reproduction in different  computer languages.<br />
<br />
On the basis of those considerations, the Court holds that neither the  functionality of a computer program nor the programming language and the  format of data files used in a computer program in order to exploit  certain of its functions constitute a form of expression. Accordingly,  they do not enjoy copyright protection. <br />
<br />
To accept that the functionality of a computer program can be protected  by copyright would amount to making it possible to monopolise ideas, to  the detriment of technological progress and industrial development. <br />
<br />
In that context, the Court states that if a third party were to procure  the part of the source code or object code relating to the programming  language or to the format of data files used in a computer program, and  if that party were to create, with the aid of that code, similar  elements in its own computer program, that conduct would be liable to be  prohibited by the author of the program. In the present case, it is  apparent from the explanations of the national court that WPL did not  have access to the source code of SAS Institute’s program and did not  carry out any decompilation of the object code of that program. It was  only by means of observing, studying and testing the behaviour of SAS  Institute’s program that WPL reproduced the functionality of that  program by using the same programming language and the same format of  data files.<br />
<br />
Second, the Court observes that, according to the Directive, the  purchaser of a software licence has the right to observe, study or test  the functioning of that software in order to determine the ideas and  principles which underlie any element of the program. Any contractual  provisions contrary to that right are null and void. Furthermore, the  determination of those ideas and principles may be carried out within  the framework of the acts permitted by the licence.<br />
<br />
Consequently, the owner of the copyright in a computer program may not  prevent, by relying on the licensing agreement, the purchaser of that  licence from observing, studying or testing the functioning of that  program so as to determine the ideas and principles which underlie all  the elements of the program in the case where the purchaser carries out  acts covered by that licence and the acts of loading and running  necessary for the use of the program on condition that that purchaser  does not infringe the exclusive rights of the owner of the copyright in  that program.<br />
<br />
In addition, according to the Court, there is no copyright infringement  where, as in the present case, the lawful acquirer of the licence did  not have access to the source code of the computer program but merely  studied, observed and tested that program in order to reproduce its  functionality in a second program.<br />
<br />
Lastly, the Court holds that the reproduction, in a computer program or a  user manual for that program, of certain elements described in the user  manual for another computer program protected by copyright is capable  of constituting an infringement of the copyright in the latter manual if  that reproduction constitutes the expression of the intellectual  creation of the author of the manual.<br />
<br />
In this respect, the Court takes the view that, in the present case, the  keywords, syntax, commands and combinations of commands, options,  defaults and iterations consist of words, figures or mathematical  concepts, considered in isolation, are not, as such, an intellectual  creation of the author of that program. It is only through the choice,  sequence and combination of those words, figures or mathematical  concepts that the author expresses his creativity in an original manner.</blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq"> It is for the national court to ascertain whether the reproduction  alleged in the main proceedings constitutes the expression of the  intellectual creation of the author of the user manual for the computer  program protected by copyright".</blockquote>This all seems fairly unremarkable; now it's up to the referring court to apply it.

Functionality of computer programs, language, unprotected by copyright, says CJEU Judgment was given this morning by the Court of Justice of the European Union in Case C-406/10 SAS Institute Inc. v World Programming Ltd, a reference from the Chancery Division, England and Wales. There's a fai…

24May2012

<h3 class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name"> <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2012/05/ip-address-is-not-person.html">An IP address is not a person</a> </h3><div class="post-header">  </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"> <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEibamqmTarlv-49mN8Nintiv7FTl40z9GhvvlL67KAd5Qy36iWiDT_JMbqCcv3Javkp9YqHt52hyphenhyphenuMcMR5S79Pu4yrV5VnJ2SA7QXp0b707_827Dasq2xH9XMNaZslKW8H02b8m8JvRaYA/s1600/I%2527m+spartacus.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="156" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEibamqmTarlv-49mN8Nintiv7FTl40z9GhvvlL67KAd5Qy36iWiDT_JMbqCcv3Javkp9YqHt52hyphenhyphenuMcMR5S79Pu4yrV5VnJ2SA7QXp0b707_827Dasq2xH9XMNaZslKW8H02b8m8JvRaYA/s400/I%2527m+spartacus.jpg" width="224" /></a></div>In the USA, Judge Magistrate Gary Brown (US District Court, Eastern  District of New York) has gone to great lengths to explain why an IP  address is not the same as a person and cannot be used to bring claims  against alleged copyright infringers.<br />
<br />
In the States, Mass-BitTorrent lawsuits have been “dragging on for more  than two years” and involve more than a quarter million potential  illegal downloaders. The copyright owners who start these cases  generally provide just an IP-address as evidence of the infringement and  as the identity of the ‘John Doe’ infringer. The court is then asked to  grant a subpoena, allowing the claimant to require an Internet Service  Provider for the personal details of the alleged offenders. Judge Brown  is of the opinion this is a “waste of judicial resources” and that the  argument that IP-addresses can identify the alleged infringers is very  weak with Judge Brown saying<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq"> “The assumption that the person who pays for Internet access at a given  location is the same individual who allegedly downloaded a single  sexually explicit film is tenuous, and one that has grown more so over  time” </blockquote>adding<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq"> “An IP address provides only the location at which one of any number of  computer devices may be deployed, much like a telephone number can be  used for any number of telephones ….  Thus, it is no more likely that  the subscriber to an IP address carried out a particular computer  function – here the purported illegal downloading of a single  pornographic film – than to say an individual who pays the telephone  bill made a specific telephone call”. </blockquote>Judge Brown went to explain that in his opinion having an IP-address as  evidence of an infringer is even weaker than a telephone number, as the  majority of US homes now have a wireless network - meaning that many  people, including complete strangers if one has an open network, can use  the same IP-address simultaneously.<br />
<br />
This latter point was tested by the courts in Germany where the German  Supreme Court (BGH) indicated that a subscriber who left their wi-fi  open without password protection was potentially liable for others'  infringing activities but only in as much as the subscriber could be  enjoined to an action and forced to take necessary precautions - they  would not be liable for damages (financial penalties) for another's  infringement.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://torrentfreak.com/judge-an-ip-address-doesnt-identify-a-person-120503/">http://torrentfreak.com/judge-an-ip-address-doesnt-identify-a-person-120503/</a> and <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/92229567/Judge-Gary-Brown-IP-Address-Ruling">http://www.scribd.com/doc/92229567/Judge-Gary-Brown-IP-Address-Ruling</a> and an opinion on copyright ‘trolls’ here <a href="http://slworona.wordpress.com/tag/judge-gary-r-brown/">http://slworona.wordpress.com/tag/judge-gary-r-brown/</a> and for the German position see here <a href="http://ipkitten.blogspot.co.uk/2010/05/germany-liability-for-unsecured-private.html">http://ipkitten.blogspot.co.uk/2010/05/germany-liability-for-unsecured-private.html</a>

An IP address is not a person In the USA, Judge Magistrate Gary Brown (US District Court, Eastern District of New York) has gone to great lengths to explain why an IP address is not the same as a person and cannot be used to bring claims against alleged copyright infringers. In the States, Ma…

24May2012

<h3 class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name"> <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2012/05/whilst-searching-copyright-troll-on.html">Troll news</a> </h3><div class="post-header">  </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"> <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWBIN_D4H2RLMziMDzzxoOZtKRwt0ipBFB7R1IGTyE75Vmn7pC10saHXEcWUT_EVgaYLZMb1DdDSnUzNQSwOu5koUuq0BfImgwD8fUd5v_9o06sW6iRgk4R67RagITGgvFPLxpNK2bhiE/s1600/COPYRIGHT+TROLL+1.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="232" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWBIN_D4H2RLMziMDzzxoOZtKRwt0ipBFB7R1IGTyE75Vmn7pC10saHXEcWUT_EVgaYLZMb1DdDSnUzNQSwOu5koUuq0BfImgwD8fUd5v_9o06sW6iRgk4R67RagITGgvFPLxpNK2bhiE/s400/COPYRIGHT+TROLL+1.jpg" width="217" /></a></div>Whilst searching "copyright troll" on Google for my previous post, I came across a wrap up on the <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/righthaven-another-mediacat.html">Righthaven</a>  1709 Blog we posted in November 2011. As suspected, and with apologies  for blogging at such a late stage, it all ended up rather badly for the  troll, echoing the<a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.co.uk/2011/02/media-cat-saga-now-for-obituary.html"> 'Media CAT / ACS:Law'</a> case in the United Kingdom.  <br />
<br />
Righthaven LLC, the law firm headed up by Steve Gibson, which rather publicly failed in its attempt to make money for <i>The Denver Journal, the Las Vegas Review Journal </i>and  itself by suing readers for sharing stories online, was finally dealt a  death blow mid-March by a federal judge who ordered the Las Vegas  company to forfeit “all of” its intellectual property and other  “intangible property” to settle its debts. As commentators say, the  order is a somewhat ironic twist to a copyright trolling saga that began  in 2010, when Righthaven was formed with the idea of suing blogs and  websites that re-posted newspaper articles (or snippets of them) without  permission. U.S. District Judge Philip M. Pro of Nevada ordered  Righthaven to surrender for auction the 278 copyrighted news articles  that were the subject of its lawsuits. saying “The copyright  registrations to more than 275 works are in Righthaven’s name, can be  transferred by this court, and can then be auctioned”. The  Righthaven.com domain was auctioned for $3,000 to help satisfy the legal  bill Righthaven must pay to one of its defendants that prevailed in a  copyright suit brought by Righthaven. The legal costs are more than  $60,000 in the case before Judge Pro, and in total Righthaven owes about  $188,927 to various defendants.<br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="font-size: 15px;"><br />
</span></span><br />
As of the 3rd May there was seemingly no buyer interest in the  copyrights up for auction - and a 50% discount was applied by Lara  Pearson, the court appointed attorney handling the sales. The Righthaven  trade mark was sold for $1,025 on eBay. There is a minimum bid of $50  for copyrights and you have till Saturday (5pm, PDT) to buy your slice  of copyright 'history'. <br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.pinewswire.net/article/judge-orders-failed-copyright-troll-to-forfeit-all-copyrights/">http://www.pinewswire.net/article/judge-orders-failed-copyright-troll-to-forfeit-all-copyrights/</a><br />
<a href="http://www.vegasinc.com/news/2012/may/03/prices-slashed-righthaven-copyrights-auction/">http://www.vegasinc.com/news/2012/may/03/prices-slashed-righthaven-copyrights-auction/</a>

Troll news Whilst searching "copyright troll" on Google for my previous post, I came across a wrap up on the Righthaven 1709 Blog we posted in November 2011. As suspected, and with apologies for blogging at such a late stage, it all ended up rather badly for the troll, echoing the 'Media CAT …

24May2012

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post. …

24May2012

<h3 class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name"> <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2012/05/willis-wins-revision-of-copyrights-in.html">Willis wins reversion of copyrights in YMCA case</a> </h3><div class="post-header">  </div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"> </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"> <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgneIH-SGnlQznra0Uhp2jUruosUM6gV5vE1miLC2hb6t6wBhb5Awwa4_Bkmgy14Wy_-tpWEJZaMyRi5kNbKG4mtMbc15nDHDffmX4mQ7jvb1drw7BQPEIj3GkXfX1B3gYuU5VBAA3k8vo/s1600/village+peeps2.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgneIH-SGnlQznra0Uhp2jUruosUM6gV5vE1miLC2hb6t6wBhb5Awwa4_Bkmgy14Wy_-tpWEJZaMyRi5kNbKG4mtMbc15nDHDffmX4mQ7jvb1drw7BQPEIj3GkXfX1B3gYuU5VBAA3k8vo/s1600/village+peeps2.jpg" /></a></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"> <span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;">In a court ruling which has significant implications for the music industry, a Californian judge has dismissed a suit by two song publishing companies aimed at preventing Victor Willis, former lead singer of The Village People, from exercising his right to <span class="apple-converted-space">reclaim ownership of <i>YMCA</i> and a number of other massive Village People hits </span>he wrote and co-wrote in the 1970s. <span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial;">The right to reclaim arose when the Copyright Act amendments went into effect in 1978 and it meant that songwriters could terminate copyright grants to publishers and record labels 35 years later. If they were to do so, however, they need to send their termination notices not fewer than two or more than 10 years from the intended termination date. The floodgates have opened! But Willis met with resistance from m</span>usic publishers Scorpio Music and Can’t Stop Productions who countered by arguing (a) that Mr. Willis had no legal standing to reclaim the song’s copyrights because he had “no right, title or interest in the copyright” as the songs had been created under the provisions of a “works for hire” relationship – in effect Willis and his co-writers were employees of the companies that managed the group and (b) also further arguing that Willis could not reclaim his share of the song because a majority of the other copyright holders had not agreed. It was on the latter point that the court made it’s decision.</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"> </div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"> <span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;">Chief Judge Barry T. Moskowitz in the Federal District Court in Los Angeles rejected the song publishers’ claim that Mr. Willis was not eligible to reclaim his share of ownership of “<i>YMCA</i>” whose lyrics he wrote, and 32 other songs recorded by the Village People saying “The purpose of the Act was to safeguard authors against unremunerative transfers and address the unequal bargaining position of authors, resulting in part from the impossibility of determining a work’s value until it has been exploited ” adding in his 10-page ruling “under plaintiffs’ interpretation, it would be more difficult to terminate an individual grant than it would be to make it in the first place” and Judge Moskowitz added  </span><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;">"It would be contrary to the purpose of the [Copyright] Act to require a majority of all joint authors who had, at various times, transferred their copyright interests in a joint work to terminate the legally permissible separate grant by one joint author of his undivided copyright interest in the work”.</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"> </div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"> <span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;">Willis’ attorney, Brian Caplan is quoted as saying “This is the first case that’s interpreting the statute that deals with termination rights .... the significance of the ruling is that one author who gives a grant to a publishing company has the right to recapture the copyright interest he created 35 years ago regardless of what other co-authors do or don’t do, and that the author gets back that which he created regardless of the income stream he agreed to over 35 years ago.”</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"> </div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"> <span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;">Interestingly, the issue of whether the songs were created as ‘works for hire’ remains undecided as the claimants withdrew that claim.</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"> </div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"> <span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;">Mr. Willis’s has now regained (partial) ownership not just of <i>“YMCA”</i> but also of other hits, including “<i>In the Navy” </i>and “<i>Go West”</i> and said in a written statement “I’m extremely pleased with the court’s determination” adding  “And I look forward to controlling my copyright interests in 2013, as the law provides.”</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"> </div><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;">Other acts including Bob Dylan, Tim Waits, Bryan Adams, Bruce Springsteen, Billy Joel, Kenny Rogers, The Doobie Brothers, Fleetwood Mac and Tom Petty are said to be similarly asking for the revision of both song writing and recording copyrights.</span>

Willis wins reversion of copyrights in YMCA case In a court ruling which has significant implications for the music industry, a Californian judge has dismissed a suit by two song publishing companies aimed at preventing Victor Willis, former lead singer of The Village People, from exercising …

24May2012

<h3 class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name"> <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2012/05/australias-art-resale-scheme-can-it.html">Australia's art resale scheme: can it ever be self-sustaining?</a> </h3><div class="post-header">  </div>From John R. Walker, one of our Australian readers, comes this fascinating and provocative item:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"> </div><blockquote class="tr_bq"> "The Australian government's minister for the Arts, Simon Crean, has just announced an additional $700,000 in public funds to subsidize the operation of the art resale scheme. This brings the total publicly funded commitment to nearly $2.5 million, plus if you add the $1+ million that <b><a href="http://www.copyright.com.au/">CAL </a></b>(appointed collection agency) has allocated, the scheme is rapidly exceeding a cost of $3 million:  so far, it has delivered just $600,000 in payments to artists. The Government <b><a href="http://www.minister.regional.gov.au/sc/releases/2012/may/sc049_2012.aspx">statement </a></b>says:  "As the income from resales increases, it is anticipated the scheme will become self-sustaining." </blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq">  The scheme was premised on a market size and turnover that was, even at the height of the boom, wildly overestimated by a factor of at least 2 or more.  Even a fully retrospective and compulsory scheme such as enacted in the UK, would not be self-funding in Australia; the long term market here is simply not large enough. </blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq">  This government's policies have had a devastating effect on the art market: the resale scheme  has undermined confidence resulting in reduced demand and, at the same time the ruling on SMSF (Self-managed super funds) will result in a massive over-supply of indigenous art for resale on to a reduced market. In this situation, the very idea that a scheme premised on levying on the value of art resales ever becoming even vaguely self-funding is ludicrous. </blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq">  The paradox is that the Australian government has done the resale royalty, at a secondly instrumentation level, as professionally as it could be done and the Act itself reflects the constraints of a constitution that set out very consciously to embody the principles of responsible representative government:  therefore, the Australian scheme is a <i>lawful</i> scheme. However, the messy reality is clear proof that resale royalties, at the level of principle, if done lawfully and properly, are bad policy".</blockquote>Do you agree with John, or do you take a different view? Do let us know!

Australia's art resale scheme: can it ever be self-sustaining? From John R. Walker, one of our Australian readers, comes this fascinating and provocative item: "The Australian government's minister for the Arts, Simon Crean, has just announced an additional $700,000 in public funds to subsidize…

24May2012

<h3 class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name"> <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2012/05/pirate-bay-now-sailing-to-echr-harbour.html">Pirate Bay now sailing to the ECHR harbour</a> </h3><div class="post-header">  </div><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgh4GxRW-3khxpYhJaLUxblotTT0PLtJc6MVHFTDBOGi6GXpiWomJRODYhC2Nui02YT8MdQu68vLE3AzA1wE9568gcpQm7769_OeCpw31YNY7uLdBkYcNvXlGQzHCZqyRBa5BThQZYx8Qo/s1600/pirate+bay.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgh4GxRW-3khxpYhJaLUxblotTT0PLtJc6MVHFTDBOGi6GXpiWomJRODYhC2Nui02YT8MdQu68vLE3AzA1wE9568gcpQm7769_OeCpw31YNY7uLdBkYcNvXlGQzHCZqyRBa5BThQZYx8Qo/s200/pirate+bay.jpg" width="200" /></a> <div style="margin-bottom: 6.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;"> <span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">The Pirate Bay saga seems indeed destined to never end. </span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 6.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;"> <span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Earlier  this year, Sweden's Supreme Court refused to hear Pirate Bay's final  appeal and two of the founders and the funder of the (in)famous website  were found guilty of copyright infringement (<i>see<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></i>Ben's post<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.it/2012/02/pirates-lose-final-appeal.html"><span lang="EN-US">here</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">). Parallel actions for copyright infringement brought in The Netherlands and the UK also ended up pretty badly for The Pirate Bay (<i>see<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></i></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.it/2012/01/dutch-court-blocks-access-to-pirate-bay.html"><span lang="EN-US">here</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">,<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.it/2012/04/is-it-red-letter-day-for-pirate-party.html"><span lang="EN-US">here</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"> and<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.it/2012/05/5-uk-isps-ordered-to-block-pirate-bay.html"><span lang="EN-US">here</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">).</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;"> <span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Those more prone to discouragement might have thought that this series of adverse outcomes put the word "the end" to the business of Pirate Bay. </span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">But, apparently, the last word has not yet been said.</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;"> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFiiTwQiymKy7RnZcmssFlyH-cpJCOwQ9AvnJRc1Rh4cj8-rgPaZzN766JP4rTUCh_8FUzPxGwEYrQWWZgHUumNqOdey0Tk6sRBF_Ctuq26Mt2x9OW-yy2K5TH8K2BsfrtYyso1QyhT48/s1600/pirate.jpg" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="196" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFiiTwQiymKy7RnZcmssFlyH-cpJCOwQ9AvnJRc1Rh4cj8-rgPaZzN766JP4rTUCh_8FUzPxGwEYrQWWZgHUumNqOdey0Tk6sRBF_Ctuq26Mt2x9OW-yy2K5TH8K2BsfrtYyso1QyhT48/s200/pirate.jpg" width="200" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">An enthusiastic Pirate Bay user <br />
portrayed while exerting his <br />
freedom of expression</span></i></td></tr>
</tbody></table><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">As reported by<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-founder-takes-case-to-european-court-120514/"><span lang="EN-US">TorrentFreak</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">, today the lawyer of one of the founders of the website,<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fredrik_Neij"><span lang="EN-US">Fredrik Neij</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">, announced that he will now bring Neij’s case to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). </span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Neij is now the only one whose fate is still unclear, as his fellow defendants in the litigation before Swedish courts have either settled or plead for clemency. </span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">The<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.dn.se/debatt/the-pirate-bay-grundare-gar-vidare-till-europadomstolen"><span lang="EN-US">statement</span></a></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"> </span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">released by Neij's lawyer reads as follows (translation provided by TorrentFreak):</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-left: 35.4pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;"> <span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">“<i>According to Article 10 of the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></i></span><i><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.echr.coe.int/NR/rdonlyres/D5CC24A7-DC13-4318-B457-5C9014916D7A/0/CONVENTION_ENG_WEB.pdf"><span lang="EN-US">European Convention on Human Rights</span></a></span></i><i><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">, which guarantees citizens of Sweden the freedom to receive and impart information, we believe that Frederick Neij’s right to freedom of expression has been denied him ... According to our complaint to the European Court, The Pirate Bay’s services – to transfer non-proprietary information among users through an automated process on the Internet – is protected under that article of the Convention</span></i><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">.”</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 6.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-align: -webkit-auto;"> <span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">On this reading, The Pirate Bay is said to have never directly transferred or transmitted copyright-protected contents, as this was the sole responsibility of the site’s users. Indeed, the actual function of the website was “<i>to allow the free dissemination of information via non-copyrighted torrent files</i>.”</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 6.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-align: -webkit-auto;"> </div><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Desperate attempt of a lawyer to save his client -- or food for thought re the future of P2P file-sharing?</span>

Pirate Bay now sailing to the ECHR harbour The Pirate Bay saga seems indeed destined to never end. Earlier this year, Sweden's Supreme Court refused to hear Pirate Bay's final appeal and two of the founders and the funder of the (in)famous website were found guilty of copyright infringement…

24May2012

<h3 class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name"> <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2012/05/api-battle-for-google.html">API battle for Google</a> </h3><div class="post-header">  </div><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgoUcVk-Wx5fmqpgQSItKI32KBXx67y7xviStc6w3ZuhKJRIiah1SEWANT8YUaYtxWMOzaPkvCYnkrR_moyAIK_RNWPkgh2wu0fg0psdcfquHg3KYQPYm_Mfvmp9rQbnisPaiBemWComEA/s1600/api1.gif" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="116" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgoUcVk-Wx5fmqpgQSItKI32KBXx67y7xviStc6w3ZuhKJRIiah1SEWANT8YUaYtxWMOzaPkvCYnkrR_moyAIK_RNWPkgh2wu0fg0psdcfquHg3KYQPYm_Mfvmp9rQbnisPaiBemWComEA/s200/api1.gif" width="200" /></a>The  Electronic Frontiers Foundation have reported on the legal debates  surrounding the action brought by Oracle against Google for the use of  Oracle's APIs, whether copyright can subsist in those API's and if it  did, could Google claim fair use.<br />
<br />
Before we go any further - a brief definition of APIs "An application  programming interface (API) is a specification intended to be used as an  interface by software components to communicate with each other. An API  may include specifications for routines, data, structures, object  classes. In 2010, Oracle bought Sun Microsystems, which developed Java.  When it implemented the Android OS, Google wrote its own version of Java  -but in order to allow developers to write their own programs for  Android, Google relied on Java’s APIs."<br />
<br />
This is what the EFF have to say:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq"> "Here’s the problem: Treating APIs as copyrightable would have a profound negative impact on interoperability, and, therefore, innovation. APIs are ubiquitous and fundamental to all kinds of program development. It is safe to say that<i> all</i> software developers use APIs to make their software  work with other software. For example, the developers of an application  like Firefox use APIs to make their application work with various OSes  by asking the OS to do things like make network connections, open files,  and display windows on the screen. Allowing a party to assert control  over APIs means that a party can determine who can make compatible and  interoperable software, an idea that is anathema to those who create the  software we rely on everyday. Put clearly, the developer of a platform  should not be able to control add-on software development for that  platform. </blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq"> Take, for example, a free and open source project like Samba, which runs  the shared folders and network drives in millions of organizations. If  Samba could be held to have infringed the Microsoft’s copyright in its  SMB protocol and API, with which it inter-operates, it could find itself  on the hook for astronomical damages or facing an injunction requiring  that it stop providing its API and related services, leaving users to  fend for themselves.<br />
<br />
Another example is the AOL instant messaging program, which used a  proprietary API. AOL tried to prevent people from making alternative IM  programs that could speak to AOL's users. Despite that, others  successfully built their own implementations of the API from the  client's side. If copyright had given AOL a weapon to prevent  interoperability by its competitors, the outcome for the public would  have been unfortunate.<br />
<br />
Setting aside the practical consequences, there’s a perfectly good legal reason not to treat APIs as copyrightable material: they are purely functional. The law is already clear that copyright cannot cover programming languages, which are merely mediums for creation (instead, copyright may potentially cover what one creatively writes in that language).  Indeed, the European Court of Justice came to just that <a href="http://www.the1709blog.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/functionality-of-computer-programs.html">decision</a> last week  (Ironically enough, when Sun Microsystems was an independent company,  one of its lawyers wrote amicus briefs arguing that interoperability  concerns should limit copyright protection for computer programs.) </blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq"> Improvidently granting copyright protection to functional APIs would  allow companies to dangerously hold up important interoperability  functionality that developers and users rely on everyday.  Let’s hope  the judge agrees."</blockquote><a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/05/oracle-v-google-and-dangerous-implications-treating-apis-copyrightable">https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/05/oracle-v-google-and-dangerous-implications-treating-apis-copyrightable</a> <br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120502/14085818744/eu-court-justice-says-software-functionality-is-not-subject-to-copyright.shtml"><i>SAS Institute Inc.  v World Programming Limited</i></a> :  CJEU: "to accept that the functionality of a computer program can be  protected by copyright would amount to making it possible to monopolise  ideas, to the detriment of technological progress and industrial  development".

API battle for Google The Electronic Frontiers Foundation have reported on the legal debates surrounding the action brought by Oracle against Google for the use of Oracle's APIs, whether copyright can subsist in those API's and if it did, could Google claim fair use. Before we go any further …

24May2012

<h3 class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name"> <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2012/05/more-on-dajaz1com-and-is-tppa-next-acta.html">More on Dajaz1.com, and is TPPA the next ACTA?</a> </h3><div class="post-header">  </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"> <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicihgjYthSEHkGvV8NXtLfUAWrGyX16G0CTl05LY_MK8El2zKq0dAOKybt6DJ2xUgA6e2cnyOiSA5Lown9QwHkIh-LYF475JCTH5QU99cIjOPPLT3-7sHiY65aeld3KQRcI73t7zKKY7M/s1600/daj.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicihgjYthSEHkGvV8NXtLfUAWrGyX16G0CTl05LY_MK8El2zKq0dAOKybt6DJ2xUgA6e2cnyOiSA5Lown9QwHkIh-LYF475JCTH5QU99cIjOPPLT3-7sHiY65aeld3KQRcI73t7zKKY7M/s1600/daj.png" /></a></div>Last week we briefly<a href="http://www.the1709blog.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/neelie-says-acta-is-doomed.html"> reported</a> on the <i>Dajaz1.com</i>  case in the USA which critics of the U.S. government's antipiracy efforts said  showed that authorities are too eager to do the bidding of copyright  owners. The Immigration and Customs Enforcement Bureau (ICE) seized  Dajaz1.com, a music blog, in November 2010 and then held onto it for  more than a year, only returning the domain to the owners after  repeatedly failing to produce evidence that the site had violated  copyright laws. The EFF picked up on the story blogging: <br />
<blockquote> "The whole story is, in a word, appalling …. U.S. taxpayers and their  representatives have an object lesson, if one were needed, in why the  government should not be granted new IP enforcement powers and why we  need to reconsider the inclusion of copyright infringement as a basis  for civil seizure and forfeiture."</blockquote>The EFF now has more - saying the popular blog dedicated to hip hop  music and culture remained censored "because the government obtained  three secret extensions of time by claiming that it was waiting for  'rights holders' and later, the Recording Industry Association of  America, to evaluate a "sampling of allegedly infringing content" obtained from the website and respond to other “outstanding questions.”  The EFF say “In other words, having goaded the government into an  outrageous and very public seizure of the blog, the RIAA members refused  to follow up and answer the government’s questions. In turn, the  government acted shamefully, not returning the blog or apologizing for  its apparent mistake, but instead secretly asking the court to extend  the seizure and deny Dajaz1 the right to seek return of its property or  otherwise get due process. The government also refused to answer  Congressional questions about the case. ICE finally released the domain name in  December of 2011, again with no explanation.” <br />
<br />
The next battle front for the EFF appears to be the <b>Trans-Pacific Partnership</b>  (TPP) Agreement, a “secret international trade negotiation that  includes provisions to regulate intellectual property and the Internet”.  In Dallas culture-jamming activist group The Yes Men presented U.S.  Trade Representative Ron Kirk with the fictitious "2012 Corporate Power  Tool Award." Over 18,000 Internet users have used the EFF action center  to speak out against the TPP. Methinks we may have another ACTA (or  indeed SOPA, PIPA, etc) ....... time will tell. <br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/05/unsealed-court-records-confirm-riaa-delays-were-behind-year-long-seizure-hip-hop"><span style="color: blue;">https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/05/unsealed-court-records-confirm-riaa-delays-were-behind-year-long-seizure-hip-hop</span></a>  <br />
<br />
<a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57428362-93/critics-say-feds-riaa-too-closely-linked-in-music-site-seizure/">http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57428362-93/critics-say-feds-riaa-too-closely-linked-in-music-site-seizure/</a>

More on Dajaz1.com, and is TPPA the next ACTA? Last week we briefly reported on the Dajaz1.com case in the USA which critics of the U.S. government's antipiracy efforts said showed that authorities are too eager to do the bidding of copyright owners. The Immigration and Customs Enforcement Bu…

24May2012

<h3 class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name"> <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2012/05/dramatico-belated-note-on-sequel.html">Dramatico: a belated note on the sequel</a> </h3><div class="post-header">  </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"> <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjBWhd_jR-YsXXIdVuPkCSakgQKFlfAFQhigtRcZjL0LgxGd_RpUVgL4Mi2aGm5o6RnaC8wZ6ZPE9760NNlTMO-wvD0WALd2kvMK1NdewUXrr6iJLIeG2-CUSooECek_f72tlK04MSjJ7c/s1600/noax.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="193" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjBWhd_jR-YsXXIdVuPkCSakgQKFlfAFQhigtRcZjL0LgxGd_RpUVgL4Mi2aGm5o6RnaC8wZ6ZPE9760NNlTMO-wvD0WALd2kvMK1NdewUXrr6iJLIeG2-CUSooECek_f72tlK04MSjJ7c/s200/noax.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>In February we posted a note, "Pirate Bay "a stronger case" of infringement than Newzbin", <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/pirate-bay-stronger-case-of.html"><b>here</b></a>, on the decision of Mr Justice Arnold in <i>Dramatico Entertainment Ltd & others v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd & others </i>[2012]  EWHC 268 (Ch) to the effect that British ISPs could be ordered to block  access to The Pirate Bay. In a further development earlier this month,  in <i>Dramatico Entertainment Ltd & others v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd & others </i><b><a href="http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2012/1152.html">[2012] EWHC 1152 (Ch),</a></b> the same judge gave further consideration to the making of the orders in question.<br />
<br />
To recap, the claimants were record companies which sought orders  blocking access to the file-sharing facilitator The Pirate Bay -- both  in their own right and in a representative capacity on behalf of other  members of BPI (British Recorded Music Industry) Ltd and Phonographic  Performance Ltd. The defendants were the six major retail internet  service providers. Following the earlier judgment, the claimants  subsequently agreed the terms of the orders with five of the six  defendants for the purpose of blocking or impeding access to The Pirate  Bay.<br />
<br />
For the court to have jurisdiction to make the orders sought by the  claimants, three matters had to be established: (i) the defendants had  to be 'service providers' within the meaning of the Copyright, Designs  and Patents Act 1988, s.97A; (ii) users and/or operators of The Pirate  Bay must have used the defendants' services in order to infringe  copyright, and (iii) the defendants must have had actual knowledge of  the use for infringing purposes. As to (iii), the claimants contended  that the defendants had acquired actual knowledge through evidence which  was given by counsel during the proceedings on behalf of the BPI,  through the contents of the claimants' evidence in support of their  claim and in the findings of the first judgment itself.<br />
<br />
In a very short (13 paragraph) judgment, and without the need to listen  to submissions from the defendants -- who did not put in an appearance  -- Arnold J granted the orders in the form sought by the claimants.   There was no doubt that the defendants were ISPs; there was evidence  that The Pirate Bay's website was used for infringing purposes and that  the defendants had knowledge of this. <br />
<br />
Of particular interest, since the question of access to The Pirate Bay  is a matter which, we learn, is likely to be coming before the European  Court of Human Rights (see Eleonora's post <b><a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/pirate-bay-now-sailing-to-echr-harbour.html">here</a></b>), is this:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq"> " ... One of the arguments advanced by BT in <i><b><a href="http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2011/1981.html">20C Fox v BT</a></b> </i>was that the order sought by the applicants in that case would be contrary to <b><a href="http://www.hri.org/docs/ECHR50.html#C.Art10">Article 10</a></b>  of the European Convention on Human Rights. I did not accept that  argument for the reasons I gave at [163]-[177]. In so holding, I  distinguished the reasoning of Advocate General Villalón in his <b><a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/ag-advises-ecj-isps-cant-be-ordered-to.html">Opinion </a></b>dated 14 April 2011 in Case C-70/10 <i>Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs compositeurs et éditeurs (SABAM)</i>. Since then, the Court of Justice of the European Union has delivered its <b><a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/will-copyright-owners-see-red-over.html">judgment </a></b>in that case on 24 November 2011 [2011] ECR I-0000 and its judgment in <b><a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/filtering-is-not-for-social-networks.html">Case C-360/10 </a></b><i>Société belge des auteurs compositeurs et éditeurs (SABAM)</i> <i>v Netlog NV</i> on  16 February 2012 [2012] ECR I-0000. I have considered those judgments  with care, but I do not believe they call into question any of my  reasoning in <i>20C Fox v BT</i>. In particular, I have considered  whether it makes any difference if, instead of asking whether the order  would be contrary to Article 10 ECHR, it is asked whether the order  would be contrary to Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of  the European Union (<b><a href="http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf">"the Charter"</a></b>), as suggested by those judgments. I do not believe that that would make any difference".</blockquote>

Dramatico: a belated note on the sequel In February we posted a note, "Pirate Bay "a stronger case" of infringement than Newzbin", here, on the decision of Mr Justice Arnold in Dramatico Entertainment Ltd & others v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd & others [2012] EWHC 268 (Ch) to the effect that B…

24May2012

<h3 class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name"> <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2012/05/copyright-tribunals-final-decision-in.html">Copyright Tribunal's final decision in Meltwater now available</a> </h3><div class="post-header">  </div><div style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"> </div><div style="text-align: right;"> </div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 6pt;"> <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"> <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhakOXR5DbIPxAukwx__gPjt7vnLzVKUe2aVP6LmTHdQbUzu_z_JBg2ZQh2LAagdNkpL4SI5dn6hi5Glqb8xJ34snIe6FCKkL_kprDr7zx5lFzegHGmQQdLti19TUH5-5MCqGE2DWd7bXQ/s1600/newspaper_licensing_agency.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhakOXR5DbIPxAukwx__gPjt7vnLzVKUe2aVP6LmTHdQbUzu_z_JBg2ZQh2LAagdNkpL4SI5dn6hi5Glqb8xJ34snIe6FCKkL_kprDr7zx5lFzegHGmQQdLti19TUH5-5MCqGE2DWd7bXQ/s1600/newspaper_licensing_agency.png" /></a></div><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjn_YEDdSM2S1gycO5xitlzV6TNQOCDmYQq3BcUOJle4bex0JzHzwJAPWfitvmZKF_wlnszCeFMOb6PKaKcIuRwVgpo6o0H_dQ7-Ely-VfWRrXQiuFcNgdyL__85Cvpt4lPZVuellbgPB0/s1600/meltwater-monogram.png" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjn_YEDdSM2S1gycO5xitlzV6TNQOCDmYQq3BcUOJle4bex0JzHzwJAPWfitvmZKF_wlnszCeFMOb6PKaKcIuRwVgpo6o0H_dQ7-Ely-VfWRrXQiuFcNgdyL__85Cvpt4lPZVuellbgPB0/s200/meltwater-monogram.png" width="138" /></a><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">As readers of this Blog will remember, last February the </span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.ipo.gov.uk/ctribunal.htm"><span lang="EN-US" style="color: blue;">Copyright Tribunal</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"> published its </span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.ipo.gov.uk/ct11409-140212.pdf"><span lang="EN-US" style="color: blue;">interim decision</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"> in the fascinating case of <i>Meltwater Holding v The Newspaper Licensing Agency</i></span><i><span lang="EN-US" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"> </span></i><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">(<i>see </i>1709 Blog's coverage</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"> </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.it/2012/02/meltwater-copyright-tribunal-ruling-now.html"><span lang="EN-US" style="color: blue;">here</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"> </span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">and </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.it/2012/02/meltwater-copyright-tribunal-ruling-out.html"><span lang="EN-US" style="color: blue;">here</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">). </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 6pt;"> <span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Now, the Tribunal has issued its </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.ipo.gov.uk/ct11409-final-150212.pdf"><span lang="EN-US" style="color: blue;">final decision</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">.</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 6pt;"> <span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Controversy arose out of a new pair of licences promoted by NLA in 2010, called the Web Database Licence ("WDL”) and Web End Users Licence (“WEUL”). The WDL/WEUL relate to the particular type of media monitoring activity carried out by Meltwater. </span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 6pt;"> <span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">The NLA contended that the nature of Meltwater’s business meant that both it and its customers needed to take out WDL and WEUL agreements. Meltwater’s position was that it was prepared to enter into the WDL and undertook to do so, but that its customers did not have to enter into the WEUL at all. This was because Meltwater’s customers, by receiving the Meltwater service, did not commit any of the acts restricted by copyright and therefore did not need a licence. As clarified by the Tribunal in its interim decision, </span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-left: 35.4pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;"> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiFKqqATQ2tSHSoQkVXCK6MoY70WNmrQRWBcVMZXBjpIFHYbow960vHmS-1g2vW9djcZkr9JGu1o82xsdJmLiJc8ozzSuOCy8xDTTxAA51ybfriYV-fezhwTUEJLS5V0DnMk9VSJmT2s3Y/s1600/darkknightrises-bane.jpeg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiFKqqATQ2tSHSoQkVXCK6MoY70WNmrQRWBcVMZXBjpIFHYbow960vHmS-1g2vW9djcZkr9JGu1o82xsdJmLiJc8ozzSuOCy8xDTTxAA51ybfriYV-fezhwTUEJLS5V0DnMk9VSJmT2s3Y/s320/darkknightrises-bane.jpeg" width="224" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><i>Surely there is more expectation about the </i><br />
<i>Supreme Court's </i>Meltwater <i>ruling </i><br />
<i>than the release of </i>The Dark Knight Rises<i> ... <br />
Definitely.</i></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table><i><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">In a nutshell Meltwater’s point was that the material sent to customers was too insubstantial to be a copyright work or to be a substantial part of the original news article. Copying the material would not infringe (if there was no licence) and so copying the material was not a restricted act</span></i><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">.</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 6pt;"> <br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 6.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;"> <span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><span lang="EN-US">The findings of the Tribunal were however that </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 6.0pt; margin-left: 35.4pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;"> <span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><i><span lang="EN-US">end users of a headline only service should enter into the WEUL just like end users of the normal Meltwater News service of headlines plus extracts and should be subject to the same tariff rates</span></i><span lang="EN-US">.</span></span></div></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 6pt;"> <span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">This said, the Tribunal agreed with Meltwater and the PRCA's contention that the NLA's proposed licensing scheme was not reasonable and required amendment.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 6pt;"> <span lang="EN-US" style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">As reported by </span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.journalism.co.uk/news/meltwater-nla-content-licencing-agreement-copyright-tribunal/s2/a549268/"><span lang="EN-US" style="color: blue;">journalism.co.uk</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">, since the interim decision of the Copyright Tribunal, the parties have worked together in close consultation to reach an agreement on the finer details of the licensing payment model, with a revised fixed price agreed upon.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 6pt;"> <span lang="EN-US" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Now, the Tribunal has accepted the terms proposed by the parties as "reasonable".</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 6pt;"> <table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjii1T4colxeC3nyPwJiQeAfZdX2QWlodkSJjzgokhVaM1ZbPdI-SsBMz1kGVkpHEiXZn0XvAdXyU8CUCKxSF4dzF1wg7aqopcommtmIMMTLdLj5ogfnL9luED2yduWUWAbAOwT-XJHrc/s1600/fans.jpg" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="212" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjii1T4colxeC3nyPwJiQeAfZdX2QWlodkSJjzgokhVaM1ZbPdI-SsBMz1kGVkpHEiXZn0XvAdXyU8CUCKxSF4dzF1wg7aqopcommtmIMMTLdLj5ogfnL9luED2yduWUWAbAOwT-XJHrc/s320/fans.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><i>Some copyright enthusiasts are already camping </i><br />
<i>outside the Supreme Court, </i><br />
<i>waiting for the start of the </i>Meltwater<i>'s hearings</i></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Compared to the first licensing scheme, the agreement now includes - <i>inter alia</i> - reduced rates for the very smallest users (low number of employees) and, in parallel to this, increased rates for the users with high numbers of employees.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 6pt;"> <span lang="EN-US" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Co-founder of the Meltwater Group Jens-Petter Glittenberg explained that the NLA and Meltwater are now committed to ensuring that UK end users of such monitoring services are licensed quickly, fairly and efficiently. </span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"></span></div><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">So far so good -- but fans of this saga will have to keep holding their breath for a year or so. Meltwater and PRCA appealed aspects of the Court of Appeal's </span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2011/890.html"><span lang="EN-US" style="color: blue;">decision</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"> on web browsing to the Supreme Court (<i>see </i></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.it/2011/11/meltwater-appeal-to-go-to-supreme-court.html"><span lang="EN-US" style="color: blue;">here</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">). </span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Release of the sequel is expected in early 2013.</span>

Copyright Tribunal's final decision in Meltwater now available As readers of this Blog will remember, last February the Copyright Tribunal published its interim decision in the fascinating case of Meltwater Holding v The Newspaper Licensing Agency (see 1709 Blog's coverage here and here). No…

24May2012

<h3 class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name"> <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2012/05/no-more-uk-legislation-on-internet.html">No more UK legislation on Internet Piracy (yet)</a> </h3><div class="post-header">  </div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrutahSqQvwrxOGc-D5kmsoNo_I9XEF2MJvmC0mD0TN8apG9rdGPdXtgJ19r7LU0t4SQlzbAHPW7eli2aRMQDGOjtG2-jzjWGQCYbW3GUNgX9DZgYth9v60XJJWpw0ykqNmSWZx0w0UWI/s1600/hunt.jpg" style="clear: right; cssfloat: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrutahSqQvwrxOGc-D5kmsoNo_I9XEF2MJvmC0mD0TN8apG9rdGPdXtgJ19r7LU0t4SQlzbAHPW7eli2aRMQDGOjtG2-jzjWGQCYbW3GUNgX9DZgYth9v60XJJWpw0ykqNmSWZx0w0UWI/s1600/hunt.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Hunt describes the size of the <br />
internet piracy issue in the UK</td></tr>
</tbody></table><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"> The Guardian <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/may/17/communications-green-paper-delayed">reports</a>  tonight that the long-awaited Communications Green Paper, originally  promised to be unveiled to an expectant public last November, has been  postponed until at least September. </div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"> </div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"> Apparently the responsible minister, Jeremy Hunt, has some other stuff  going on involving something called the Leveson enquiry and his  relationship with certain newspaper proprietors, so it is felt to be an  inauspicious time for him to be launching a new flagship policy. </div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"> </div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"> Now, some of us would be surprised to learn that a Communications Green  Paper, which is supposed to be the next step on the route to updating  communications and broadcasting regulation, has anything to do with  copyright law at all, but at least according to the Guardian, setting  out the Government's position on Internet piracy is one of the areas  which the paper is expected to cover. </div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"> </div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"> This blogger is very surprised that the Government is planning to start  poking its hand around in that particular hornet's next in a hurry.  After all, the previous Government's Internet piracy legislation, passed  some 2 years ago, is not really operative yet and the first letter  writing campaign under it is not expected now to emerge until 2014, just  as the French equivalent, the Loi Hadopi is <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/artinfo/the-french-election_b_1496676.html">under threat of being repealed by the new French administration</a>, despite <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/france-claims-50-drop-in-online-piracy.html">its apparent success</a>. </div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"> </div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"> Similarly, the hostile reception given to <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=ACTA">ACTA</a> - riots in Brussels followed by Commissioner Kroes announcing its imminent demise and, in the United States, to <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=Sopa">SOPA</a>  might lead a pragmatic Government, let alone a Secretary of State who  has other things on his mind (or possibly even his successor) to wonder  whether further legislation on this particular topic is really such a  bright idea, or whether a Communications Bill that could focus on other  things might be better. After all, there might be said to be a good  argument to hang fire until a measured judgement could be taken about  the effectiveness of a combination of the forthcoming DEA implementation  and the new ISP injunctions involving Newzbin and Pirate Bay.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"> </div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"> We look forward to finding out in September (or, at least, not before....) where this issue is going.</div>

No more UK legislation on Internet Piracy (yet) Hunt describes the size of the internet piracy issue in the UK The Guardian reports tonight that the long-awaited Communications Green Paper, originally promised to be unveiled to an expectant public last November, has been postponed until at …

24May2012

<h3 class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name"> <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2012/05/deadline-for-submissions-to-hadopi.html">Deadline for Submissions to HADOPI Consultation on "Exceptions to Copyright and Related Rights" Extended to July 15, 2012</a> </h3><div class="post-header">  </div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"> <a href="http://www.hadopi.fr/sites/all/themes/hadopi/images/visuels/logo_site_hadopi.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="70" src="http://www.hadopi.fr/sites/all/themes/hadopi/images/visuels/logo_site_hadopi.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<br />
HADOPI, the French administrative authority tasked with implementing the  three-strike graduated response to unauthorized P2P file sharing has  extended the deadline for responses to the very interesting public  consultation it is conducting on Exceptions to Copyright and Related  Rights.<br />
<br />
Interested parties now have until <b>July 15th</b> to submit their contributions.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"> </div>Relevant information and the Questionnaire can be found (in French and English) here: <a href="http://www.hadopi.fr/actualites/actualites/consultation-sur-l-exercice-effectif-des-exceptions-au-droit-d-auteur-et-aux-d">http://www.hadopi.fr/actualites/actualites/consultation-sur-l-exercice-effectif-des-exceptions-au-droit-d-auteur-et-aux-d</a>

Deadline for Submissions to HADOPI Consultation on "Exceptions to Copyright and Related Rights" Extended to July 15, 2012 HADOPI, the French administrative authority tasked with implementing the three-strike graduated response to unauthorized P2P file sharing has extended the deadline for re…

24May2012

<h3 class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name"> <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2012/05/ifpi-and-global-recording-industry-have.html">IFPI welcomes court ruling finding vKontakte liable for copyright infringement</a> </h3><div class="post-header">  </div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"> <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicbDswIr41ypUibOYtdqyI355rd0vEP-oVWkS1xNREaT9oWHGBhm3D9555clHvjeYVlpmyLM6_3-x1D8M00Xhe5wpZw549fOZ86pvcOeJFEXIrWO4-XxOjUqa3VIcW5wF_dqnONlxOIDg/s1600/Vk.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicbDswIr41ypUibOYtdqyI355rd0vEP-oVWkS1xNREaT9oWHGBhm3D9555clHvjeYVlpmyLM6_3-x1D8M00Xhe5wpZw549fOZ86pvcOeJFEXIrWO4-XxOjUqa3VIcW5wF_dqnONlxOIDg/s1600/Vk.jpg" /></a></div><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The IFPI and  the global recording industry have welcomed the verdict of the Russian  appeal court (17th May 2012) that confirmed social networking and  downloading site vKontakte is liable for copyright infringement. The  case against vKontakte was brought by SBA Music Publishing and SBA  Production and members of the Gala Records Music Group, a subsidiary of  EMI in Russia. The cases were based on vKontakte making many of Gala’s  music compositions and sound recordings available without licensing  agreements in place. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
The  judgment by the Saint Petersburg appeal court upheld the earlier ruling  by the commercial (“Arbitrazh”) Court of Saint Petersburg in  January.Frances Moore, chief executive of IFPI, said : “This judgment  sends a clear signal to those in Russia that seek to build their  businesses on the back of other people’s content. We urge vKontakte to  take immediate steps to stop its service being used to infringe  copyright on a massive scale" adding “Widespread digital piracy is  preventing Russia from developing a thriving legitimate digital music  sector and this in turn denies Russian artists a chance of success and  starves them of investment by producers.” </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The IFPI say  that the Russian market has declined substantially since 2007, from  US$191 million to US$76.6 million. During that time, the digital market  has grown, yet last year saw a substantial fall even in digital revenue,  which the IFPI attribute to piracy  vKontakte is Russia’s most popular online entertainment platform with  more than 110 million registered users and is one of the top 50 most  visited sites in the world, attracting more traffic than BBC Online or  CNN.com. Its valued at upwards of $1.5 billion (though in facebook  world, who knows what its worth today - or what it might be worth  tomorrow!). The unlicensed vKontakte music service allows streaming of  music from an extensive catalogue of Russian and international sound  recordings and encourages software developers to create apps for illegal  downloading of content using vKontakte.  </span><br />
<br />
source: <a href="http://www.ifpi.org/">www.ifpi.org</a>

IFPI welcomes court ruling finding vKontakte liable for copyright infringement The IFPI and the global recording industry have welcomed the verdict of the Russian appeal court (17th May 2012) that confirmed social networking and downloading site vKontakte is liable for copyright infringement…

24May2012

<h3 class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name"> <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2012/05/performers-in-africa-ask-to-be-paid.html">Performers in Africa ask to be paid</a> </h3><div class="post-header">  </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"> <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTXdWnULNxmWMXb9L0JsLCRhILkpQeifIxGL5DASFMs6aD-LxDwE0GSWD_lBEbFvzUL3qc__bitkMqNJSp-s08u4eMWN9u11Pa0lQlfbW1cVma-qI66d7sBZkCcVOqH29KJHZnDr5pEco/s1600/sega.drumround.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTXdWnULNxmWMXb9L0JsLCRhILkpQeifIxGL5DASFMs6aD-LxDwE0GSWD_lBEbFvzUL3qc__bitkMqNJSp-s08u4eMWN9u11Pa0lQlfbW1cVma-qI66d7sBZkCcVOqH29KJHZnDr5pEco/s320/sega.drumround.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The Ghana Association of Phonographic Industries (GAPI) is considering filing a legal suit against the Government of Ghana because government and other state institutions used Ghanaian music works without paying royalties. Project Coordinator for GAPI, Francis Mensah Twum told Adom Entertainment News the Information Services Department (ISD), and the National Commission on Civic Education (NCCE) use Ghanaian music in their vans that go round to educate the public, but they do not pay royalties. GAPI also cited political parties for the same offence, saying that GAPI is speaking with its lawyers to prepare a legal suit against the offenders which, including the government.  </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Mr. Twum Mensah however noted that alternatively, government could support the forthcoming Copyright Bank/Fund with seed capital to compensate for the millions of cedis of accumulated in unpaid royalties it owed the industry. He explained that apart from government not paying royalties due the industry, government also delayed the passage of the Copyright Law, and it took another four years before it enacted the Legislative Instrument to make the law operational which “allowed piracy to continue and the industry lost an average of $30 million a year, which amounted to about a $400 million loss over the period,” he said </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In Kenya, Music producers and performers including guitarists, drummists and dancers will start getting equal remuneration from television and radio royalties, if proposed changes in the copyright laws are passed. This will be the first time that dancers, guitarists and other instrumentalists will start earning royalties from their talents and from the works that they participate in. While proposing the new laws, Attorney-General Professor Githu Muigai has factored in the rise of public performances and use of video recordings by local musicians and producers without remunerating back-up artistes. Previously, the Music Copyright Society of Kenya (MCSK) collected royalties on behalf of composers and singers and left out the bulk of producers and acoustic players. Prof Muigai has proposed amendments to the Kenya Copyright Act 2001 (No 12 of 2001) by inserting a new clause (30A) which now gives music producers the right to claim and equitably share remuneration for sound recordings and visual works among themselves. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/AG+pushes+for+changes+in+sharing+of+music+cash+/-/539546/1408300/-/57w0tsz/-/">http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/AG+pushes+for+changes+in+sharing+of+music+cash+/-/539546/1408300/-/57w0tsz/-/ </a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://entertainment.myjoyonline.com/pages/news/201205/85991.php">http://entertainment.myjoyonline.com/pages/news/201205/85991.php</a></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Image of a Mauritian <i>sega</i> drummer from <a href="http://www.edwebproject.org/mauritius/sega.html">http://www.edwebproject.org/mauritius/sega.html</a> : The <i>sega</i> is the national dance a of Mauritius. Introduced by African slaves during the French colonial period, the <i>sega</i> is an exotic, often erotic dance. The dancers are backed a a group of drummers and other instrumentalists. </span>

Performers in Africa ask to be paid The Ghana Association of Phonographic Industries (GAPI) is considering filing a legal suit against the Government of Ghana because government and other state institutions used Ghanaian music works without paying royalties. Project Coordinator for GAPI, Francis…

24May2012

<h3 class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name"> <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2012/05/in-cinema-filming-remains-major-piracy.html">In-cinema filming remains a major piracy problem - but does the UK government care?</a> </h3><div class="post-header">  </div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"> </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"> <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgM69vCvSjqjL2th3c8fvyPKYhZzwOgV8_3-__FdCNvOvWbZ7Gq3UIEYA1H_3XtLnjV6_XQtNPOzqVt9HockRqZi1qpStIEaAA91u5iy82_uIRCHwPo38lLIIjmHYG-U2k6bC8O8yIJQ38/s1600/avatar1.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="190" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgM69vCvSjqjL2th3c8fvyPKYhZzwOgV8_3-__FdCNvOvWbZ7Gq3UIEYA1H_3XtLnjV6_XQtNPOzqVt9HockRqZi1qpStIEaAA91u5iy82_uIRCHwPo38lLIIjmHYG-U2k6bC8O8yIJQ38/s320/avatar1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The Cinema  Exhibitors Association have said that 90% of illicit film downloads on  the internet originate from recordings illicitly made in cinemas,  despite the efforts of cinema chains such as Odeon, Vue and Cineworld to  stamp out the practice. Now the cinemas trade association has accused  the UK Government of being "soft" on movie piracy after rejecting plans  to create a specific offence related to covertly videotaping screenings  of new films, a move proposed by a film policy panel chaired by Lord  (Chris) Smith, the former Labour Culture Secretary. The Department of  Culture Media and Sport says that the practice is adequately covered by  the 2006 Fraud Act. Charges can also be brought under section 107/1(e)  of  the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The CEA says  that pirates offer bounties of up to £20,000 a time for a copy of a new  film, that illegal recordings cost the UK cinema industry £220 million  per annum in lost sales, and that they make substantial efforts to  reduce the filming including providing staff with infra-red glasses to  detect suspicious activity. The 'cammers' are now so organised they make  stereo recordings at the 'production' stage - and even re-lay foreign  language soundtracks in 'post production'. The CEA say the police have  little interest in prosecuting alleged offenders and that there have  been just five successful prosecutions under the Fraud Act since 2010,  not least as there is a need to show the defendant who illicitly mad the  recording in the cinema was acting for financial gain.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The Top five pirated films of all time (by illegal downloads)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">1   <i>Avatar  </i>21 million</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">2. <i>The Dark Knight</i> 19 million</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">3.  <i>Transformers</i>  19 million</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">4.  <i>Inception </i> 18 million</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">5.  <i>The Hangover </i> 17 million</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">(source: Torrentfreak).</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The Time, page 46, 19th May 2012 and for some background see <a href="http://torrentfreak.com/uk-movie-cammer-faces-jail-sentence-100814/">http://torrentfreak.com/uk-movie-cammer-faces-jail-sentence-100814/</a> and for the CEA's response to Gowers see <a href="http://www.allpartyipgroup.org.uk/pdfs/CEA%20Response%20to%20All-Party%20Inquiry.pdf">http://www.allpartyipgroup.org.uk/pdfs/CEA%20Response%20to%20All-Party%20Inquiry.pdf</a> </span>

In-cinema filming remains a major piracy problem - but does the UK government care? The Cinema Exhibitors Association have said that 90% of illicit film downloads on the internet originate from recordings illicitly made in cinemas, despite the efforts of cinema chains such as Odeon, Vue and…

24May2012

<h3 class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name"> <a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2012/05/isps-six-strikes-enforcement-plan.html">ISPs' six strikes enforcement plan delayed</a> </h3><div class="post-header">  </div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrYq0Fw3l2n2yDtHgvEHC3q8uJZFYrxaE-Yb47Ut5LcwRsOAg_hMqtAVKaqIN7OpMpBccl4CFJa-DZxXrrJAfnQm1pHBefbx8a1Bmbo1f02_gPCRzEI3c7wVqDh_UKa_IkgPL30OR1YlQ/s1600/unplug.jpg" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="221" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrYq0Fw3l2n2yDtHgvEHC3q8uJZFYrxaE-Yb47Ut5LcwRsOAg_hMqtAVKaqIN7OpMpBccl4CFJa-DZxXrrJAfnQm1pHBefbx8a1Bmbo1f02_gPCRzEI3c7wVqDh_UKa_IkgPL30OR1YlQ/s320/unplug.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS',sans-serif; font-size: x-small;"><i>How disconnection works in practice</i></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">A couple of months ago this Blog </span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.it/search?q=six+strikes"><span lang="EN-US">reported</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"> that the ISPs' six strikes enforcement plan (on which <i>see </i></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.it/2011/07/us-content-industry-and-isps-to-inform.html"><span lang="EN-US">here</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">) was due to enter into force next July. </span><br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 6.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;"> <span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">The plan is the result of an agreement between some major US ISPs (AT&T, Cablevision, Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Verizon) and music and film industries (through </span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.riaa.com/"><span lang="EN-US">RIAA</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"> and </span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.mpaa.org/"><span lang="EN-US">MPAA</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">), aimed at adopting and implementing policies directed at discouraging their customers from illegally downloading copyright-protected materials.</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 6.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;"> <span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><span lang="EN-US">The plan envisages a system through which, when a copyright owner complains to an ISP, that ISP sends a (possible) series of online alerts to the subscriber that he/she is infringing copyright. After six warnings ISPs may take a variety of repressive measures, which include slowing down offenders’ connections and temporary disconnections.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 6.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;"> <span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><span lang="EN-US">In any case, when entering the agreement, ISPs made it clear that </span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">they would </span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">(1) protect their subscribers' privacy and not filter/monitor their own networks for infringements and (2) never terminate an internet connection entirely, or otherwise interfere with subscribers' ability to receive calls and emails.</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 6.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;"> <span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><span lang="EN-US">During a panel discussion at the annual meeting of the Association of American Publishers, RIAA's CEO<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cary_Sherman"><span lang="EN-US">Cary Sherman</span></a><span class="apple-converted-space"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></span><span lang="EN-US">announced that most of the participating ISPs would begin implementing the enforcement program by next July.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 6.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;"> <span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><span lang="EN-US">However, as reported by<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><a href="http://torrentfreak.com/us-six-strikes-anti-piracy-scheme-delayed-120518/"><span lang="EN-US">TorrentFreak</span></a><span class="apple-converted-space"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></span><span lang="EN-US">and<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><a href="http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Six-Strikes-Copyright-Alert-System-CCI-BitTorrent-Piracy,news-15266.html"><span lang="EN-US">Tom's Guide</span></a><span lang="EN-US">, </span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">now </span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">the start of the program has been delayed until later in the year. </span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;"> <span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><span lang="EN-US">As commented by a spokesperson for the Center for Copyright Information (</span><a href="http://www.copyrightinformation.org/"><span lang="EN-US">CCI</span></a><span lang="EN-US">), which is supposed to engage in the tracking down of pirates as part of the enforcement plan, </span></span></div><span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">  </span></span><br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 6.0pt; margin-left: 35.4pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;"> <table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="clear: left; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhuOdaH77NFZu93Vix7r8uJKEm56nqzLANKlit8DIP7S1-YQsWEAVOANS7PDxolXxU6kgUIqKO1nkG_5rOkc4GWhDYdg63UBvyo2qwDR21TK0Q6vQdYiiFMv06aCuelMD7HEnussC0mrIE/s1600/love+letter.JPG" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="361" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhuOdaH77NFZu93Vix7r8uJKEm56nqzLANKlit8DIP7S1-YQsWEAVOANS7PDxolXxU6kgUIqKO1nkG_5rOkc4GWhDYdg63UBvyo2qwDR21TK0Q6vQdYiiFMv06aCuelMD7HEnussC0mrIE/s400/love+letter.JPG" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS',sans-serif; font-size: x-small;"><i>ISPs are busy preparing their model online alerts</i></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table><span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><span lang="EN-US">“<i>The dates mentioned in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) are not hard deadlines but were intended to keep us on track to have the Copyright Alert System up and running as quickly as possible and in the most consumer friendly manner possible ... </i></span><i>We do not intend to launch until we are confident that the program is consumer friendly and able to be implemented in a manner consistent with all of the goals of the MOU. We expect our implementation to begin later this year</i>.”<span lang="EN-US"></span></span></span></div><span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"> </span><br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;"> <span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"><span lang="EN-US"><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">In any case, participating ISPs remain in favour of voluntary and private enforcement solutions. For instance, Verizon has declared that it has </span></span></span></div><span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"> <div style="margin-bottom: 6.0pt; margin-left: 35.4pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;"> <span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><span lang="EN-US">"<i>always said that copyright infringement is wrong and through this voluntary consumer friendly system, we believe we can educate our consumers and offer them access to legal alternatives ... [T]his  program offers the best approach to the problem of illegal file sharing and, importantly, is one that respects the privacy and rights of our subscribers. It also provides a mechanism for helping people to find many great sources of legal content</i>.”</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;"> <span lang="EN-US"><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Apparently, as  reported by TorrentFreak, the CCI has made it clear, that none of the ISPs has plans to terminate the accounts of subscribers. This does not  mean, however, that temporary disconnection is no longer an option. </span></span></div></span>

ISPs' six strikes enforcement plan delayed How disconnection works in practice A couple of months ago this Blog reported that the ISPs' six strikes enforcement plan (on which see here) was due to enter into force next July. The plan is the result of an agreement between some major US ISPs (AT&…

24May2012

Subscribe to: Posts ( Atom )

The 1709 Blog

Expert Author Showcase: Sheryl Letzgus McGinnis

Business Blogging - How to Create a Blog That Will Represent You Well and Build Your Online Business

Comparing Vitamix Models 5200 and 1709

Popular Posts

Blog Archive