Skip to main content

Home/ Media & Culture @ HM/ Group items tagged law

Rss Feed Group items tagged

sophie mann

Top 10 Copyright Law Scandals That Rocked the World in 2009 - 2 views

  •  
    Date issued: January 7, 2010. An article from Law Vibe. Written by C.C. at International Law News/Lawyer Lifestyle. The article was written about what in the writer's opinion were the top ten biggest copyright infringement lawsuits between 2000 and 2009. Cases such as "Napster shuts down", "Apple sues Pystar", and UMG and Viacom take on Veoh and Youtube" lead the article. A reoccurring theme in the business of copyright lawsuits seems to be illegal file sharing online. Many websites that provided options for illegally downloading music have been sued or shut down over the years, including Napster and Pirate Bay. Modeling agencies such as Perfect 10 sued Google over copyrighted pictures of their models showing up online, the courts however ruled this fair use and the case has since been closed. This article shows a brief history of how copyrighting has become a central legal issue over the past decade and how various companies and defendants have dealt with the cases presented to them.
Tom McHale

How well-informed are citizens, and how are they getting their news? | Poynter. - 0 views

  •  
    "The way the public gets news continues to change with digital - and especially mobile forms - gaining audiences. Some shifts raise questions about the amount and quality of news consumed. All that leads to the crucial question of what people know about major public issues. Last week's Pew study on the Affordable Care Act didn't inspire confidence in the public's knowledge of news. Pew's survey found that "44% of Americans are unsure whether ACA remains the law. About three-in-ten (31%) say they don't know, while 8% think it has been repealed by Congress and 5% believe it was overturned by the Supreme Court." Should we cheer because more than half those surveyed (57%) knew that the law is being implemented? Should we allow slack for those who didn't know, since the Act is complicated and changes have been made and proposed? Is the study evidence of separate and unequal societies, one informed and one uninformed? To get a better sense of how the public is consuming news, and how journalists can best reach them, it's helpful to look at some data. Recent studies tracking news consumption could leave the impression we've moved from well-rounded civic information meals to fast-food news snacking."
Steven Tr

INTELLECTUAL PIRACY IN CHINA - 0 views

  •  
    In the USA, intellectual piracy laws outlaw piracy of goods from all forms of the market, from medical to the watch industry. This helps prevent the origenal producers of drugs and products from losesing billions on the market. China does not have such laws, allowing for piracy of everything from Viagra to Rolex, causing companies to lose billions
  •  
    China does not have these laws primarily because under communism, there is no privet property, including ideas. This allows for easy bootlegging of products, and when this involves drugs such as Viagra, it endangers the lives of the people using the bootlegged drug, because there has not necessarily been the same testing of the bootlegged drug as there is on the drug made by the company. Intellectual property laws ensure quality within a product.
Adam Kenner

Insurrection Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - 0 views

  •  
    All changes to this law enacted in 2006 (as discussed today) were repealed in January 2008. This wikipedia article covers the original law, the 2006 changes and the 2008 repeal.
rachel lander

Software Issue Kills Liberal Amendment To Copyright Laws - 0 views

  •  
    Computers are now making it easier to find and quote unpublished sources without citing them, and this is a huge conflict. People are in dispute about the existing copyright laws because they think that there are still ways to freely quote things that aren't yours because of the internet. A copyright amendment was passed in 1979 to try to address this problem. It has become a bigger problem since the internet has taken off. Several cases about this issue are being brought to the supreme court, and they declined them. Freidman says that the court inpterpreted the amendment to mean an author cannot quote more than 50 words of unpublished material without citing.
Diana Rheinstein

Draft Copyright Enforcement Treaty Stirs Censorship Debate - 0 views

  •  
    Washington: Oct 21, 2010.This article, written by Eliza Krigman published in the Congress Daily/P.M. Krigman is an education reporter for top political and public policy magazines she is based in the UK. This article discusses how currently rights holders of companies and many government leaders are determined to crack down on Internet piracy through stricter enforcement. Public-interest groups argue that such rules can jeopardize free speech, particularly in countries without the types of safeguard measures found in American law and are angry. The possibility of using copyright law to justify censorship drew attention recently when the New York Times exposed how the Russian government used Microsoft to suppress political dissidents. This issue is very relevant to everyone whether you are a right's holder or user or a copyrighted products. LINK:http://techdailydose.nationaljournal.com/2010/10/ip-enforcement-policies-stir-c.php
Mike .

Copyright Challenge for Sites That Excerpt - 0 views

  •  
    Issued: March 2009. Big companies are starting to crack down on copyright infringements. With over 15 lawsuits in 2007, the number of lawsuits targeted against blogs has started to rapidly rise. The author, Brian Stelter, is a writer for New York Times who's main focus is on television and the digital media. This article seems to be aimed at the big companies who the author believes are unfairly digging into to copyright laws. The article mentions a lot of disputes such as the ones between New York Times and Gate House Media, Silicon Alley Insider and The Wall Street Journal, Associated Press and All Headlines News and others. Most of the websites getting sued were blogs or newspaper websites that quoted other people's works, assuming it would be okay under the "fair use" statute of copyright laws.
  •  
    i went to the New York Times online to search the term, "copyright" to get an article relating to copyright issues or infringement. this article by Brian Stelter was published on March 1st, 2009. Stelter is a journalist for the New York Times. Stelter sides with the people who claim to be getting copyrighted. He bases the majority of his article against the bloggers and other online publishes "who seem to be on the rise." He also questions when excerpting from an article becomes illegal copying. Although he mostly sides with the people claiming to be copyrighted he also sheds light on those bloggers and online publishers whom give credit to those sites they excerpted information from. Statler keeps bringing up the issue of "excerpting to find value" in which online publishers combine articles to validate their thesis. In the end, Statler shows both sides of the story and doesn't leave out any information regarding the thoughts of both parties.
  •  
    By BRIAN STELTER Published: March 1, 2009 Brian Stelter focuses on a quotation from the Silicon Alley Insider which quoted a quarter of Peggy Noonan's Wall Street Journal. "We thank Dow Jones in advance for allowing us to bring it to you." The editor added "in advance" because Dow Jones, the publisher of The Journal, had not given the blog permission to use the column. With this particular instance of copyright infringement and others, Stetler brings light to the fact that permission isn't being given between different industries when taking direct quotations or titles from that industries publication. "Some media executives are growing concerned that the increasingly popular curators of the Web that are taking large pieces of the original work - a practice sometimes called scraping - are shaving away potential readers and profiting from the content." He also brings up the numerous lawsuits that arise because of copyright infringement.
Kevin Yoon

The $105 Fix That Could Protect You From Copyright-Troll Lawsuits - 0 views

  •  
    There is a law, that allows "any blog or other website to register a DMCA takedown agent with the U.S. Copyright Office, an obscure bureaucratic prerequisite to enjoying a legal "safe harbor" from copyright lawsuits over third-party posts, such as reader comments." This is a reason why websites like youtube can exist. However, there is a loophole to law. A company based on Las vegas bought copy right for the Las Vegas Review-Journal, just for the purpose of suing any websites who have failed to pay 105 dollars and register with United States Copyright Office.
David Shapiroda

Creative Commons Is Rewriting Rules of Copyright - 0 views

  •  
    This article is about creative commons, and how music artists are starting to prefer it over traditional copyright. Artists such as "Chuck D and the Fine Arts Militia" released their new single under creative commons, and encouraged people to copy it, mix it, criticize it and other things. Now the song has been incorporated into new types of music and videos, and every time those are viewed, it links back to the original artist, giving them immediate popularity. Once other artists saw how this was giving the band more fans, they started releasing their songs under creative commons as well. Copyright laws provide limited flexibility, and make it harder for artists to get as many fans as they would if they released their songs under Creative Commons. Artists and authors have been saying that creative commons allows others to "build upon their creativity -- without calling a lawyer first." Now, artists are making half of their money off downloads and the other half off licensing fees. However, while many artists and authors are starting to release their work under creative commons, others like major movie studios or record labels will not, because they already make plenty of money off the current traditional copyright system.
  •  
    Creative Commons licenses are changing the media sharing environment of the internet. When people share media with a creative commons label, anybody is allowed to download, upload, and share it for free. This is good for artists who want to grow their fan bases, but bad for companies who are looking to profit from their work.
Kyle Ezring

The Facebook Lawsuit - 1 views

  •  
    In July of 2010, Paul Ceglia sued the owner and founder of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, saying that he was the rightful owner of 85% of Facebook. His said that he loaned Zuckerberg $1000 so that he could start the company Facebook. The reason that this is going to court is that there is debate over what website the money that Zuckerberg recieved was used to build. During that time, Zuckerberg also built a website about job advertising. Ceglia claims that his money went to both sites, while Zuckerberg says that it only went to the advertising website. This lawsuit shows that copyright laws extend far beyond direct copying of other peoples ideas and property. This is a case that emphasizes how difficult it can be determining the winner in cases like these.
shinil kim

The iPhone Jailbreak: A Win Against Copyright Creep - 0 views

  •  
    4. Date Issued: Wednesday, Jul. 28, 2010. An article from the TIME magazine written by Adam Cohen. Cohen, a lawyer, is a former TIME writer and a former member of the New York Times editorial board. The article focuses on the jail breaking being legal or illegal and the fight between Apple and customers who rebels against all the rules Apple has chosen for them; unfairly. But the Liberty of congress has concluded that jail breaking is a fair use. Also The Electronic Frontier Foundation mentioned that they asked the Copyright Office to give a green light to the people who jailbreaks their iPhones. But of course there are others who go against jail breaking and say that it is indeed illegal. The author here is unbiased and informative even though he is 'one of those iPhone maniacs' because he shows both point of views equally.
ShaKea Alston

LimeWire Shut Down - 0 views

  •  
    LimeWire, the popular music downloading site, has been shut down. A judge determined that the "downloading or sharing copyrighted content without authorization is illegal." LimeWire will negotiate with the major music companies about licensing deals to offer the legal sale of music. The company is now liable for damages because of their violations of the copyright laws. Issued: October 27, 2010
Gaby Novogratz

Copyrights Affecting Free/Cheap Media Streaming - 0 views

  •  
    This article is about how there are many ways that people are trying to stream music, movies, and television shows through the internet. These are legal or illegal depending on the location of the computer based on the countries piracy laws and on the contracts that the media streaming company makes with publishers/recording companies/etc. since they are trying to do this in a legal fashion. In some European companies, they are streaming music via a new service, Spotify, where subscribers can listen to music for free with advertisements, or pay short of 5 pounds for ad-free streaming. However, due to contractual disagreement, Spotify is not available in USA but they are in fact trying to bring this cheaper (but legal) music service to the Americans which could abruptly change the music industry as well as bring turmoil to services like iTunes.
Sinai Cruz

Copyright Risks in Embedding Youtube Clips - 0 views

  •  
    Embedding Youtube videos into your website can be a dangerous thing, as it might not be you that's uploaded a copyright infringing video, but it can be you that accidentally embeds a Youtube clip that is infringing made by someone else, into your website. The law against this is: Any time you incorporate a copyrighted work into a site without the rightsholders' consent, you're potentially liable to be sued. Because people are seeing that on your website, it doesn't matter if it's on Youtube or not, or whether you made it or not, you embedded it somewhere else. It also does not matter whether the person knew it was copyright infringement or not. If an innocent embedder were to be taken to court, they could still be fined up to $30,000. However, because of Youtube's copyright infringement policy, it can remove the copyrighted work from Youtube and the websites it was embedded in. Also, there would be little gain for the rightsholder if the person with the website they sued couldn't afford a lawsuit, which would hardly be worth their time. Also, there are precautions that the embedder should take as well, to ensure that even if they do post copyrighted material, they won't really be potential candidates to be sued.
Adam Kenner

Text - Text - Obama's State of the Union Address - NYTimes.com - 0 views

  • Rather than fight the same tired battles that have dominated Washington for decades, it's time to try something new. Let's invest in our people without leaving them a mountain of debt. Let's meet our responsibility to the citizens who sent us here. Let's try common sense. (Laughter.) A novel concept.To do that, we have to recognize that we face more than a deficit of dollars right now. We face a deficit of trust -– deep and corrosive doubts about how Washington works that have been growing for years. To close that credibility gap we have to take action on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue -- to end the outsized influence of lobbyists; to do our work openly; to give our people the government they deserve. (Applause.)That's what I came to Washington to do. That's why -– for the first time in history –- my administration posts on our White House visitors online. That's why we've excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs, or seats on federal boards and commissions.But we can't stop there. It's time to require lobbyists to disclose each contact they make on behalf of a client with my administration or with Congress. It's time to put strict limits on the contributions that lobbyists give to candidates for federal office.With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests –- including foreign corporations –- to spend without limit in our elections. (Applause.) I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. (Applause.) They should be decided by the American people. And I'd urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems.I'm also calling on Congress to continue down the path of earmark reform. Applause.) Democrats and Republicans. (Applause.) Democrats and Republicans. You've trimmed some of this spending, you've embraced some meaningful change. But restoring the public trust demands more. For example, some members of Congress post some earmark requests online. (Applause.) Tonight, I'm calling on Congress to publish all earmark requests on a single Web site before there's a vote, so that the American people can see how their money is being spent. (Applause.)
  •  
    See highlighted section on the Supreme Court decision just past halfway
1 - 15 of 15
Showing 20 items per page