Showing posts with label Copyright. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Copyright. Show all posts

Monday, January 11, 2016

NYPL Labs Remix Residency

New York Public Library offers its first Virtual $2,000 residency to do transformative things with its digital collection!

http://www.nypl.org/help/about-nypl/fellowships-institutes/remix

Timeline: February 19, 2016 -> March 11, 2016 -> June 30, 2016

Complete the the application form by 11:59 pm February 19, 2016.
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1PfXtiXQJVTSlVaAHjGz8DDdkCHhHxGISUsj13mGafI4/viewform?c=0&w=1 


March 11, 2016
A panel of experts will review submissions and two winners will be chosen by Friday, March 11, 2016. 

June 30, 2016
The project will be due at the end of June 2016.
Individuals or teams may submit proposals.

Recipients will receive:
  • A $2,000 stipend
  • An opportunity to meet and consult with NYPL curators and NYPL Labs staff
  • A work space in one of our research study rooms at NYPL's historic Stephen A. Schwarzman Building for the duration of the residency
  • Promotion of finished work by NYPL Labs
The NYPL is seeking submissions for projects that provide new ways of looking at or presenting public domain materials—or allow access to the information or beauty currently locked within the static images it has digitized. Submissions may include:
  • Mappings
  • Visualizations
  • Generative Art
  • Games
  • Bots
  • Interactives

Evaluation of your proposal:
  • Creativity and engagement: Is the project re-using NYPL public domain materials in an engaging way that we haven't seen before?
  • New perspective and usability: Will this project help users see the collections in new ways, by recontextualizing, remixing, or recombining the collection?
  • Feasibility: Is the project scaled and scoped so that it can be completed during the duration of the residency?
More about the NYPL Labs
http://www.nypl.org/collections/labs

Wednesday, April 16, 2014

Notice Of Public Roundtables to Discuss Vital Copyright Issues

Four roundtables are scheduled to be held in: (1) Nashville, TN on May 21, 2014, (2) Cambridge, MA on June 25, 2014, (3) Los Angeles, CA on July 29, 2014, and (4) Berkeley, CA on July 30, 2014. All roundtables will begin at 8:30 a.m. and end at 5:00 p.m. Requests to participate and observe are due three weeks in advance of each of the respective roundtables on the following dates, by 5:00 p.m. E.S.T.: (1) April 30, 2014 for the Nashville roundtable, (2) June 4, 2014 for the Cambridge roundtable, (3) July 8, 2014 for the Los Angeles roundtable, and (4) July 9, 2014 for the Berkeley roundtable. The agendas and webcast information will be available a week before each of the roundtables on the Task Force Web site, http://www.ntia.doc.gov/Internetpolicytaskforce and the USPTO's Web site, http://www.uspto.gov/ip/global/copyrights/index.jsp

The purpose of the planned roundtables is to seek additional input from the public in order for the Task Force to have a complete and thorough record upon which to make recommendations.

Each of the scheduled roundtables will be divided into separate, consecutive, sessions addressing the following topics raised in the Green Paper:

(1) The legal framework for the creation of remixes;
(2) the relevance and scope of the first sale doctrine in the digital environment; and
(3) the appropriate calibration of statutory damages in the contexts of
     (i) individual file sharers and
     (ii) secondary liability for large-scale infringement.
 
Time will be reserved at the end of each session within each roundtable for observers and viewers to comment upon the topic discussed during the session. While the subject matter will be consistent across each of the four roundtables, the allotted time for each session may vary to accommodate the specific interests of the participants at each location. In order to maximize participation, no formal opening statements or presentations are expected.
 
The roundtables will focus on (1) the questions set out in the October 3rd Federal Register Notice, 78 FR at 61338-39, (2) the issues raised in the stakeholder comments filed both before and after the Dec. 12 meeting, and (3) points made at the December 12th public meeting. Individuals participating in the roundtables may be posed questions on any of these issues.
 
Interested parties may request to participate in, or to observe, the roundtable discussions by submitting a request form, available at https://www.signup4.net/public/ap.aspx?EID=THEG32E&OID=130. [1] Participation will entail responding to questions from Task Force members and engaging with other participants, whereas observation will entail listening to, but not participating in, the discussions, although there will be time for observers to comment at the end of the discussion. Parties who wish to attend roundtables in multiple locations should submit a separate request form for each location. When completing request forms, interested parties should identify the particular discussion or discussions they wish to participate in or observe. We will respond to the requests to participate or observe two weeks before the day the roundtable will be held. Please note that the Task Force may not be able to grant all requests but will seek to maximize participation to the extent possible.
 
Participants and observers should arrive at least one-half hour prior to the start of the roundtable and must present valid government-issued photo identification upon arrival. The Task Force will provide additional information on directions and parking in the agendas for each of the roundtables.
The roundtables will be webcast. A transcription service will also be present. The transcriptions will be made available on both the Task Force and USPTO Web sites after each roundtable.

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

U.S. Copyright: Study on the "Right of Making Available" and "Communication to the Public"

 
The United States Copyright Office is undertaking a study at the request of Congress to assess the state of U.S. law recognizing and protecting “making available” and “communication to the public”' rights for copyright holders.  
 
The Office is requesting public comments on how the existing bundle of rights under Title 17 covers the making available and communication to the public rights, how foreign laws have addressed such rights, and the feasibility and necessity of amending U.S. law to strengthen or clarify our law in this area. The Copyright Office also will hold a public roundtable to discuss these topics and to provide a forum for interested parties to address the issues raised by the comments received. 
 
DATES: Comments are due on or before April 4, 2014. The public roundtable will be held on May 5, 2014, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. EDT.

Possible Changes to U.S. Law

a)     If Congress continues to determine that the Section 106 exclusive rights provide a making available right in the digital environment, is there a need for Congress to take any additional steps to clarify the law to avoid potential conflicting outcomes in future litigation? Why or why not?

b)    If Congress concludes that Section 106 requires further clarification of the scope of the making available right in the digital environment, how should the law be amended to incorporate this right more explicitly?

c)     Would adding an explicit “making available”' right significantly broaden the scope of copyright protection beyond what it is today? Why or why not? Would existing rights in Section 106 also have to be recalibrated?

d)    Would any amendment to the “making available”' right in Title 17 raise any First Amendment concerns? If so, how can any potential issues in this area be avoided? If an explicit right is added, what, if any, corresponding exceptions or limitations should be considered for addition to the copyright law?

If there are any pertinent issues not discussed above, the Office encourages interested parties to raise those matters in their comments. http://www.copyright.gov/docs/making_available/

Friday, April 26, 2013

Copyright reform?

Article from Ars Technica web site with proposals for copyright reform.
 http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/04/five-ways-congress-should-improve-the-copyright-system/

Suggested improvements:
  • Bring proportionality back to copyright penalties
  • Rein in asset forfeiture in copyright cases
  • Reform the Digital Millennium Copyright Act
  • Reduce copyright terms
  • Create a mandatory database of copyrighted works
Read the entire article for the reasons why these suggested improvements should be put into place.

Friday, February 22, 2013

Copyright for Librarians - the essential handbook

If you are interested in a free book about copyright, the EIFL has issued one in PDF format at no cost. The download link is: http://www.eifl.net/system/files/201301/cfl_book_download.pdf

The announcement is below.

"Copyright for Librarians" (CFL) is an online open curriculum on copyright law that was developed jointly with Harvard’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society.

Re-designed as a brand new textbook, "Copyright for Librarians: the essential handbook" can be used as a stand-alone resource or as a companion to the online version which contains additional links and references for students who wish to pursue any topic in greater depth.

Delve into copyright theory, understand the public domain or explore enforcement. With a new index and a handy Glossary, the Handbook is concise reading for librarians who want to hone their skills in 2013, and for anyone learning about or teaching copyright law in the information field.”

Tuesday, December 11, 2012

The (retracted) copyright report from the think tank

Law Librarian Blog has a post about the copyright report that was put out by a Republican study group and retracted within 24 hours. The post also has a link to the report, which was posted by Public Knowledge.

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

U.S. COPYRIGHT OFFICE REQUESTS COMMENTS ON ORPHAN WORKS AND MASS DIGITIZATION


Yesterday in the Federal Register the U.S. Copyright Office requested comments from the public about orphan works and mass digitization.  

The Copyright Office is interested in what has changed about orphan works and what may still need adjusting. 

Here is a link to that notice.  The outcome of this will affect you directly. The Copyright Committee is working on a position for AALL.

Thursday, October 11, 2012

Google, book scanning, and fair use

Ars Technica has an article about the recent ruling that book scanning is fair use.

First paragraph:
The Author's Guild has suffered another major setback in its fight to stop Google's ambitious book-scanning project. The Guild lost a key ally when Google settled with a coalition of major publishers last week. Now a judge has ruled that the libraries who have provided Google with their books to scan are protected by copyright's fair use doctrine. While the decision doesn't guarantee that Google will win—that's still to be decided in a separate lawsuit—the reasoning of this week's decision bodes well for Google's case. (cont)
Case: THE AUTHORS GUILD, INC., et al., v. HATHITRUST
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Case 1:11-cv-06351-HB Document 156 Filed 10/10/12
Available at http://www.scribd.com/doc/109647049/HathiTrust-Opinion

Friday, August 17, 2012

Copyright and Fair Use at Georgia State

Out of the Jungle: Copyright and Fair Use at Georgia State - Good summary by Betsy McKenzie with links to additional posts and articles regarding the whole copyright case involving GSU.

Another good post: Decision Summary: Publishers v. Georgia State University by By Dr. K Matthew Dames at Copycense.com.

Monday, August 06, 2012

Lawyers and copyright

Copyright seems to be more convulted all the time. This article on Law.com goes through multiple scenarios of possible copyright infringement and how it is seen by the courts.
Lawyers and Copyrights: Copyright in the House
By Mark A. Fischer and Paul Sennott
August 6, 2012
Law.com
Copyright laws apply to lawyers too. Yet sometimes they seem to forget this seemingly obvious fact.
(cont)

Tuesday, April 03, 2012

Copyright Alert System Board

"Six Strikes" Copyright Alert system names surprisingly good advisors
By Timothy B. Lee
Ars Technica
4/2/2012
The Center for Copyright Information, the organization tasked with overseeing a new anti-piracy scheme negotiated by the nation's leading content companies and ISPs last summer, began to take shape Monday as the organization announced its executive director and several members of its advisory board. The picks suggest that the architects of the "Copyright Alert" system may be making a serious effort to strike a balance between the interests of copyright holders and the rights of users. (cont)

Thursday, March 01, 2012

Copyright kings are judge, jury and executioner on YouTube

Copyright kings are judge, jury and executioner on YouTube

YouTube user posts video that was shot out of doors. ContentID flags background as music - only it isn't, it's just bird calls and other outdoor sounds. Music licensing group Rumblefish files a takedown notice, and YouTube grants it. Read more at Ars Technica.

Friday, February 24, 2012

Copyrighted briefs?

Something I saw over at the Law Librarian Blog:
Lawyer Copyrights Briefs, Sues West And Lexis for Distributing Them
February 24, 2012
Law Librarian Blog
Two lawyers have opened a can of copyright worms by filing a class action suit against West and Lexis for using briefs in the brief banks sold by their respective companies. (cont)

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

AALL's Fact about SOPA

Stop Online Piracy Act

The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), H.R. 3261, is intended to address the legitimate and growing problem of international intellectual property infringement, piracy and counterfeiting through new and expanded enforcement mechanisms and criminal penalties. These activities mainly exist through so-called “rogue websites” that provide access to or serve as distribution mechanisms of infringed, pirated, or counterfeit materials.

However, SOPA threatens to change the protections available to internet users and libraries. It has the potential to weaken the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) safe harbors that have allowed the internet to thrive, and threatens the privacy and freedom of speech of internet users.

Section 101 of SOPA provides new definitions, including distinctions between domestic and foreign internet sites and domain names, definitions for internet advertising services and search engines, and definitions of internet site owners and operators.

Section 102 gives the U.S. Attorney General new powers to bring actions against “foreign infringing sites that are „U.S.-directed.‟” These actions can be against the domain name registrant, website owner or against the domain name itself. Temporary or permanent injunctions can be obtained then used against internet service providers, search engines, payment processing systems, and internet advertising services, requiring them to block access or no longer provide services to enjoined websites.
Sections 103 through 105 give new powers to content owners to issue notice and take-down notices to payment providers, advertising services, and other intermediaries, which would require them to block “sites dedicated to the theft of U.S. property.”
Of particular concern to libraries, Section 201 adds a criminal penalty for unauthorized streaming of copyrighted works or making them available on a “computer network accessible to members of the public.”

AALL urges members of the House of Representatives to vote “No” on SOPA because:
 SOPA is overly broad. If used as intended, SOPA provides mechanisms for attacking websites that engage in infringing activities. However, the broad language opens too many websites to liability. For example, a library website that streams or posts content that is knowingly or unknowingly protected by copyright -- even if the post is arguably covered by fair use, or is reposted from another site -- could be subject to the sanctions by SOPA. Many websites that are neither rogue nor trying to enable infringement could be sanctioned.

SOPA threatens free speech and fair use rights. The expansion of content-owner notice and take-down powers could be used to target fair uses and chill willingness of users to fairly utilize copyrighted works.

SOPA inhibits free expression. SOPA discourages the use of copyrighted or potentially copyrighted works (e.g. orphan works) for any purpose, even legitimate, non-harmful ones. For example, the criminal penalties raise the specter of YouTube videos of individuals “covering” copyrighted songs being subject to criminal sanction even if their use of material is non-harmful and non-commercial.

Written by George H. Pike, AALL Copyright Committee
AALL Contact: Emily Feltren, (202) 942-4233, efeltren@aall.org
January 2012

Friday, December 16, 2011

Universal Music Group and takedown notices

Judge gives Universal Music 24 hours to explain takedown spree
By Timothy B. Lee
12/15/2011
Ars Technica

UMG claims "right to block or remove" YouTube videos it doesn't own
By Timothy B. Lee
12/16/2011
Ars Technica

Universal Music Group is issuing take down orders for videos posted on YouTube, and claiming private licensing agreements instead of DMCA takedowns.

Thursday, November 03, 2011

Death of Copyright First Sale?

Annemarie Bridy discusses the erosion of the first sale doctrine with respect to software and other digital information goods.

The Digital Death of Copyright's First Sale Doctrine
By Annemarie Bridy, Published on October 31, 2011
LLRX.com

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Time for Copyright Reform

Time for Copyright Reform
3 Geeks and a Law Blog
September 12, 2011

Ryan McClead wrote a post about the European Union extension of music recording copyright to 70 years. He makes an argument for extended copyright being destructive rather than helpful for the creative community at large, commenting on a BBC story about the copyright extension helping artists.

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

Reselling Free Government Data — Yes, It Stinks… But, It

Reselling Free Government Data — Yes, It Stinks… 3 Geeks and a Law Blog.

Montana has created a forms bank on their State Law Library's web site, and then laid copyright to them. A private company came along and repackaged the forms, and now the state is suing them. Read more to see Greg Lambert's synopsis and opinion on this.

Thursday, June 16, 2011

International Copyright Issues

Saw this on LibraryJournal.com
Research Libraries, Publishers Stake Out Positions on International ILL

By Michael Kelley June 14, 2011
LibraryJournal.com

A battle is brewing between research libraries and an association of academic publishers over the right to engage in international interlibrary loans and document delivery, both well-established library practices that are increasingly important to scholarship as the amount of discoverable information expands. (cont)