Group items tagged

Date issued: June 26, 2006. This article is basically about a three-day conference that was held in Rio De Janeiro. A rare global alliance of artists, scientists, and lawyers met to discuss working towards creating a "creative commons," which would give artists the privilege of deciding which rights they wished to maintain and which to share. "In its broadest form, the Creative Commons system allows creators and consumers of culture not only to view or listen to a digital work but also to copy, remix or sample it, as long as the originator is properly credit" Gilberto Gil, who is a singer-songwriter as well as Brazil's culture minister and an advocate of overhauling the global copyright, also attended the conference. Gil spoke about his six year battle in court with publishing companies to recover ownership of his work. Which now exceeds more than 400 songs which Gil has all registered with Creative Commons-he has retained the rights of some but had made others available for listeners to interpret, copy and manipulate as they please. The author of this article, Larry Rohter, appears to be mostly reporting. He doesn't blatantly state his opinion on the subject, however the article is one sided, in favor of Creative Commons and all the artists struggling to gain the copy rights of their work. He is for Creative Commons.

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.

Date Issued - June 26, 2006. This article is about Creative Commons and how people are trying to enforce it so that artists don't necessarily have to sign off on having their work as being copyright. Larry Rohter (the author) is a journalist who was a South American bureau chief of the New York Times but was originally born in Illinois. Rohter is for Creative Commons because everyone he quotes in his article supports this new idea. This article shows the good side of Creative Commons and how much of an advantage it could be for artists who like to make remix's, or use other artists work for a different type of art.

This article by Noam Cohen describes the controversy over the use of public photos on flickr. Flickr is a website used to share images with family and friends, which is now being used by company's and site's selling images without the approval of their owners. One example was Virgin Mobile's use of a picture of Alison Chang, a 15 year old, in one of their campaigns without her knowledge. The picture was under the protection of a creative commons that allowed it to be used for commercial use, making this issue more about privacy than about copyright. Virgin Mobile responded that they were "promoting creative freedom and didn't do anything wrong."

Many students in this new generation are plagiarizing other people's work for academic gain. Some college professors hypothesize that this is due t the laziness of students nowadays. Others believe it is because students were never taught about plagiarizing in middle school and highschool, so they do not understand that what they are doing is bad. However, regardless the case, internet is leading to an easy accessibility of past works, which makes it further difficult to stop plagiarizing.

Issued on April 6, 2010 in San Francisco. This article was written by Miguel Helft in the New York Times. He is a well known author for the New York Times that covers Internet companies such as Google or Yahoo. This article discusses how photographers and other artists filed a lawsuit against google for the mass copying their work. The artists claimed that they were not adequately compensated by google for the use of their work. Google was given permission from the visual artists to scan their work onto the website, however the artists feel that this partnering program with Google turned out to be unfair. Google is now being sued for copyright infringement. This article is informative to all people because it shows that even largely popular websites like Google may not be as trustworthy as perceived.

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

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.

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.

Date Issued: September 23, 2010. With Eric Pffaner's indifferent views on this article and issue, he presents an informative position, giving quotes from different opinions. The Spanish Court supported Google's YouTube instead of Telecinco, in an argument about copyright issues. In Spain, users of YouTube are now allowed to upload any clips as long as they are approved by the owners or members in these videos. The judge in Madrid still understood the serious content on copyrighted material and the complications they cause. Many individuals are opposed to this regulation because it is thought of to be "free entertainment." Even in Germany a new rule of YouTube was to pay compensation to the musicians when their songs were uploaded without their permission. Content ID, owned by Google, notifies the media owners when their content is uploaded onto YouTube without their authorization, so the holders could ask the site to take the clips down. Ever since a video of an autistic boy was bullied by his classmates, aired on different video-sharing services, there have been much more supervision and strict management over these websites. Defending itself, YouTube has said it was an "Internet service provider," rather than a television broadcaster, because these hosting services are considered more liable than others. Also, because YouTube is a very public, wide-ranged, website, the sale of advertisements have increased because many individuals visit the popular site.

A new form of Advertising has becomes successful in New York City Taxis.

Slideshow of images from this new technology. Somewhat like the photoshop site we looked at in class, this innovation can show you a theoretically more attractive version of yourself.

The Disney curse strikes again

Top editor at WSJ resigning