Group items tagged

well, this sounds familiar.

Althou this isn't about copyrit, I think this is an interesting article to look at as we begin our own Wikipedia project.

Because Facebook does not have extensive copyright preferences, artists who share their work on this website are not guaranteed what will happen to their art down the line. As more people choose to use Facebook as a media sharing website, Facebook will have to re-evaluate what rights they grant to you as a user.

I think Mr. Gordon may have a good chance of winning the lawsuit. If you look at the original picture he drew, you can see that it was more than just an idea that was taken and used to make Kung Fu Panda. He even titled his own drawings "Kung Fu Panda Power." When comparing this to Rihanna's infringement for her S&M music video, I feel that Rihanna has a better chance of escaping charges for infringement than does Dreamworks, because Rihanna was able to take photos and recreate them originally into a different form of media. Kung Fu Panda, on the other hand, is an animated film, which means that these photos weigh more heavily because they were not really originally transformed, they are the same pictures, just moving. This will be an interesting case to follow.

I thought this was interesting because whoever wins no longer has the right to his own face. I thought it would be an interesting case study considering the interplay between life-rights, copyright of the Ken doll, and any other contractual restrictions that would go with winning this kind of competition.

Bronies

Viacom is maintaining its 2007 billion dollar lawsuit against Google (as it acquired YouTube in 2006), despite the latter continuous fervent denial. Though "Google argues that when YouTube promptly took down tens of thousands of videos after Viacom gave it notice, YouTube was within provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act." Viacom is stating that the infringement is taking the form of violating the 1998 Copyright Act. Which holds both content owners and systems operators responsible for the protection of copyrighted content online. After reading this article, a few questions come to mind: What can Google do to appease and keep the "integrity" of YouTube? and Isn't it interesting that Viacom only filed this $1 billion lawsuit AFTER Google had acquired YouTube? What can we say about interested parties possibly abusing copyright law?

Although China seems to be working to eliminate mass sales of pirated goods, especially counterfeit DVDs, this regulation seems to be rather inconsistent across regions.