Group items tagged

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.

I think that the article I have chosen because it explains the fair use of media literacy through its legalities, principles, and heard of myths. They create five key principles that explain what the true legal use of media literacy should be. The writers of this document even support their words with sections on the passage entitled "What This Is" and "What This Isn't". This document proposes possible arguments that could pass as media literacy and then shuts them down describing how they are improper understandings of media literacy. The writers do their best to show the true form of "copyright education". This article mainly describes the legal aspects of fair use of media literacy.

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.

Date Issued: March 2010. An article from THE (Technological Horizons In Education) Journal written by Rama Ramaswami - a freelance business and technical writer based in New York City. The article focuses on the movement toward open educational resources where teachers have more choices to customize the curriculum, mixing and matching educational materials to create content that is tailor-made for the needs of their students, immediately. Open content refers to material published under a license that allows any user to edit, adapt, remix, and distribute it. It is distinct from free content, which is in the public domain and has no significant legal restrictions on its modification. The article appears to be fact gathering with an indifferent opinion.

An article from BNO News has recently reported that LimeWire has been shut down by a U.S. court on claims that the site was used for infringement. LimeWire is notorious for allowing its users to download music without paying for the file, which begs the question, is this legal? The Recording Industry Association of American, which represents several important record labels such as Sony, EMI, Universal, and Warner filed a lawsuit against LimeWire in 2006 stating that the company was allowing downloading of illegal music, violating the terms of the music's copyright. Since these record labels own the copyrights to the majority of the music that was being distributed, they were losing money and business because they were not getting paid for the use of their music. Lime Group, the company that owns LimeWire, continues to function otherwise, it is just this subsidiary that has been ceased to conduct business. Although the future seems bleak for LimeWire, its CEO remains optimistic.

On October 27, 2010 a very popular music sharing application called Limewire was shut down due to copyright infringement. BNO news reported the story to wireupdate.com and the a few record labels like SOny, EMI, Universal and Warner filed a lawsuit against Limewire in 2006 so this is nothing new for the file sharing company. The Lime Group CEO and owner of Limewire George Searle said "challenging time, we are excited about the future." So he seems to have a good outlook on the future eeven though his company is going through this touch time.

EDIT: The above link doesn't direct to the proper page. Try this one: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/03/technology/03youtube.html?_r=2 This article is from the New York Times, written by Claire Cain Miller and published on September 2nd, 2010. It discusses how copyrighted work is dealt with on YouTube, a video-viewing website currently owned by Google. A system called Contend ID is used to recognize videos/music that match up to material provided by copyright owners. Said owners can decide if the content should be taken down or left up. For example, someone uploaded a clip of Mad Men, a show owned by Lion's Gate. The clip was not taken down, because the revenue gotten from the advertisements surrounding the clip was enough to convince the copyright holders that leaving the video up was beneficial. This is because the money made off of YouTube ads is split between Google and the owner of the copyright, so both sides profit, legally.

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.

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

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.