Intellectual Property

  • Revised copyright law continues to provide major concerns for Spanish fans

    By .Helka Lantto on Wednesday, 9 March 2011 - 9:57am
    Message type:

    Written by Tanaqui, with additional reporting by hele

    (Please note that many of the links lead to web pages in Spanish.)

    Owners of fansites accused of copyright or trademark infringement may have gained some limited extra protection in the latest version of Spain’s new intellectual property laws, but some advocacy groups argue the new law is unnecessarily restrictive and others that it creates cumbersome procedures that won’t protect rights holders.

    The revised Sinde law, which is named after culture minister Ángeles González-Sinde, was passed in the Spanish Senate in February and will now be sent back to Spain’s other chamber, the Congress of Deputies, in March. Under the new law--a section of the wider Ley de Economía Sostenible – requests by copyright holders for sites or individual webpages to be taken down must now be subjected to judicial review before ISPs can act.

    The law has been enacted against a background of the Telecoms Reform Package passed by the European Parliament in November 2009 and pressure exerted by the USA embassy in Spain, as revealed in leaked cables published by wikileaks. González-Sinde herself has been accused of a conflict of interest, having worked as a scriptwriter and director before being appointed Culture Minister.

    While most objections to the law have focused on filesharing, the law itself simply refers to “derechos de propiedad intelectual” or intellectual property rights, meaning that a wide range of fan activities, including art, vids, fanfic and podfic could all be targeted under it. Moreover, the revisions to the Sinde law may not even provide the limited protections they purport to offer for sites run from Spain on .com domains. US authorities recently seized control of the Rojadirecta.com domain, effectively taking down Rojadirecta’s website, despite Rojadirecta's activities having been declared legal after a protracted battle in the Spanish courts.

  • Links Roundup for February 1, 2011

    By .fcoppa on Wednesday, 2 February 2011 - 3:07am
    Message type:

    Here's a roundup of recent stories that might be of interest to fans.

    * The New York Times ran a skeptical editorial upon hearing that the Conan Doyle Estate has commissioned a new, "authorized" Sherlock Holmes novel, since the Holmes stories are out of copyright in the UK and mostly out of copyright in the U.S. As the article notes, "there is no reason why an 'official' 21st-century Holmes story will be any better...than an 'unofficial' one," and concludes, "We shudder to think what the Shakespeare Estate might be endorsing now."

    * In Japan, the supreme court has ruled that a service which transfers TV to overseas viewers is illegal. This reverses earlier rulings that the service did not violate copyright law.

    *Political remixer Jonathan McIntosh has put together an HTML5 video demo using Mozilla's Popcorn.js framework in order to create an annotated remix: that is, a version in which remixers can cite sources or add footnotes. McIntosh, who believes that a transparent citing of sources might strengthen fair use claims, also offering his code, skin, and design files to anyone who wants to use them.

    We want your suggestions! If you know of an essay, video, article, event, or link you think we should know about you can submit it in three easy ways: comment on the most recent Link Roundup on LJ, IJ or DW, tag a link with "for:otw_news" on Delicious or give @OTW_News a shoutout on Twitter. Links are welcome in all languages!

    Submitting a link doesn't guarantee that it will be included in a roundup post, and inclusion of a link doesn't mean that it is endorsed by the OTW.

  • Loi HADOPI - Soucis concernant l'impact sur la créativité des fans français

    By .Helka Lantto on Sunday, 9 January 2011 - 5:50pm
    Message type:

    Les fans français vont peut être voir leur creativité, ou du moins la possibilité de partager leurs productions amateurs, ainsi que de voir celles d'autres fans, limité avec la mise en place de la nouvelle loi. Le 10 novembre 2010, le décret en rapport avec la loi HADOPI (Haute Autorité pour la diffusion des œuvres et la protection des droits sur internet) a été officiellement publié en France, apportant de nouvelles régulations pour la protection des contenus protégés sur l'Internet, et également le développment de plateformes proposant du contenu légal pour les internautes. Cependant, l'impact réel de cette nouvelle loi et de ses applications demeure incertain.

    Ce nouveau cadre juridique a pour but de protéger les industries culturelles (surtout celles de la musique et de l'audiovisuel) et d'encourager les internautes à se comporter de manière plus respectueuses envers les artistes. Malgré ce discours centré sur "le respect de l'artiste", la nouvelle loi met en avant une vision majoritairement fondée sur des intérêts commerciaux. Il existe donc un danger que la loi écarte des alternatives, des 'Licences Creative Commons' au 'fair use', dans le cas des créations de fans. Cela pourrait forcer les fans français à s'exiler vers des espaces hébergés outre Atlantique, où l'anglais est 'lingua franca', même s'il s'agit de fandom français provenant de sources françaises, qui ne bénéficient que d'une exposition très limitée à l'étranger.

  • Ley HADOPI - Preocupaciones acerca del impacto sobre la creatividad de los fans franceses.

    By .Helka Lantto on Sunday, 2 January 2011 - 9:39pm
    Message type:

    Los fans franceses pueden descubrir que su creatividad o su habilidad de compartir fanworks y visualizar los trabajos creados por otros han sido entorpecidos luego de la introducción de una nueva ley. En Noviembre 10, 2010, el decreto referente a la Ley HADOPI [Nota: página en francés] (High Authority for the Distribution of Creation and Online Protection of Rights) (también conocida como la ley de Creación e Internet) se publicó oficialmente en Francia, introduciendo nuevas regulaciones para la protección de contenidos protegidos por derechos de autor en Internet, así como la expansión de plataformas de contenido legal para los usuarios de Internet. Sin embargo, todavía se ignora cómo se aplicará esta ley.

    Este nuevo marco jurídico tiene la intención de proteger la industria de las artes (mayormente musical y de video) y alentar a los usuarios de Internet a comportarse de manera más responsable para con los artistas. Sin embargo, a pesar del discurso enfocado en el “respeto por el artista”, la nueva ley refuerza un punto de vista basado mayormente en intereses comerciales. Existe el peligro de que esta ley pueda hacer a un lado alternativas - de las licencias de Creative Commons al uso justo - para su uso en cosas tales como obras fandomeras. Esto podría mantener a los fans franceses exiliados en espacios hospedados fuera de su país donde el inglés es la lingua franca, incluso en el caso de fandoms franceses basados en fuentes en francés, las que tienen poca o nula exposición fuera del país.

  • HADOPI Law - Concerns about impact on French fan creativity

    By .Helka Lantto on Sunday, 2 January 2011 - 9:37pm
    Message type:

    Written by Natacha Guyot

    French fans may find their creativity, or their ability to share fanworks and view works created by others, stifled following the introduction of a new law. On November 10, 2010, the decree regarding the HADOPI (High Authority for the Distribution of Creation and Online Protection of Rights) Law (also known as the Creation and Internet law) was officially published in France, bringing new regulations for the protection of copyrighted content on the Internet, as well as the expansion of legal content platforms for Internet users. However, how this new law will be applied in practice remains uncertain.

    This new judicial framework is meant to protect arts industries (mostly musical and video) and to encourage Internet users to behave more responsibly towards artists. But despite the discourse focusing on "respect for the artist", the new law enforces a view based mostly on commercial interests. There is a danger that the law may push aside alternatives, from Creative Common Licenses to possible fair use for such things as fanworks. This could keep French fans exiled to spaces hosted overseas where English is the lingua franca, even when it comes to French fandoms around French sources which have little to no exposure abroad.

  • La opinión de la corte alemana refuerza la creciente diferencia entre la responsabilidad de los hospedadores webs norteamericanos y europeos.

    By .Helka Lantto on Wednesday, 27 October 2010 - 6:20pm
    Message type:

    Las cortes alemanas han indicado que podrían obligar a las empresas de hospedaje de vídeo como YouTube a buscar y eliminar de forma proactiva [NT: en inglés] videos de música que infrinjan los derechos de autor, en lugar de exigir a los titulares de derechos de autor y a los organismos de derechos de cobro que presenten avisos antes de que se eliminen los vídeos.

    Esto viene a sumarse a la condena, el febrero pasado, de tres ejecutivos de YouTube en Italia, donde la decisión del tribunal italiano incluyó una clara implicación de que todos los videos albergados en su sitio deben ser pre-seleccionados. [NT: en inglés]

    Aunque la agencia alemana de derechos de autor GEMA, perdió una solicitud de carácter urgente a finales de agosto de 2010, solicitando que el acceso a ciertos videos sea bloqueado, esto fue un pequeño consuelo para los sitios de hospedaje alemanes. El fallo se realizó sólo sobre la base de que una orden de emergencia en sí misma era inadecuada, siendo que GEMA sabía de hace mucho tiempo que los videos estaban disponibles en YouTube. El juez invitó a GEMA a solicitar una resolución en los procedimientos regulares, indicando que su reclamo en ese caso probablemente fuera exitoso. El ha sido publicado diciendo que "existen algunas buenas razones para pensar que YouTube tiene cierto deber de detectar las subidas de archivos ilegales".

    GEMA indicó [NT: en inglés] a principios de octubre del 2010 que tiene planes para presentar una nueva demanda.

    Según algunos observadores legales [NT: en inglés], el dictamen del tribunal alemán parece ser el último de varios [NT: en inglés] ejemplos [NT: en inglés] de una diferencia emergente entre la forma que una misma ley se interpreta en Europa y los EE.UU. [NT: en inglés], donde YouTube y otras empresas están cubiertas por el concepto "puerto seguro" de las disposiciones de la Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Sitios web de hospedaje basados en Europa parecen estar en mayor riesgo de ser considerados responsables por las acciones de los usuarios antes de recibir avisos de eliminación.

  • Urteilsbegründung eines deutschen Gerichts verstärkt Unterschiede in der Haftpflicht für Webhosts in den USA und Europa

    By .Helka Lantto on Wednesday, 27 October 2010 - 6:19pm
    Message type:

    Deutsche Gerichte haben angedeutet, dass sie in Zukunft gewerbliche Videoportale wie YouTube dazu zwingen werden, vorsorglich Musikvideos aufzuspüren und zu löschen, die gegen das Urheberrecht verstoßen, anstatt erst zu reagieren, wenn Rechteinhaber und -verwertungsgesellschaften formal Einspruch einlegen.

    Dieser Richterspruch folgt auf eine Verurteilung von drei YouTube-Managern im Februar dieses Jahres in Italien. Das Urteil des italienischen Gerichts impliziert deutlich, dass jedes gehostete Video vor der Veröffentlichung überprüft werden sollte.

    Obwohl die deutsche Rechteverwertungsgesellschaft GEMA mit ihrem Antrag auf eine einstweilige Verfügung Ende August 2010 gescheitert war, in dem sie die Löschung und Sperrung bestimmter Videos forderte, ist das nur ein schwacher Trost für deutsche Webhosts. Das Urteil kam nur dadurch zustande, dass das Gericht eine einstweilige Verfügung für unangebracht hielt, da die GEMA schon lange wusste, dass die Videos auf YouTube abrufbar waren. Der vorsitzende Richter forderte die GEMA dazu auf, den Anspruch in einem Hauptsacheverfahren geltend zu machen, und deutete an, dass der Erfolg in diesem Fall wahrscheinlich wäre. In der Pressemeldung des Landgerichts Hamburg steht, es "liege nahe, dass die Antragsgegnerin zumutbare Prüfungspflichten bzw. Maßnahmen zur Verhinderung erneuter Rechtsverletzungen nicht wahr- bzw. vorgenommen habe."

    Die GEMA gab Ende September 2010 bekannt, dass sie eine erneute Klage plane.

    Laut einigen Beobachtern [englisch] handelt es sich bei dem deutschen Urteil um das neueste Beispiel [englisch] einer ganzen Reihe von Urteilen, die deutlich machen, dass ähnliche Gesetze in den USA und Europa immer unterschiedlicher ausgelegt werden. In den USA fallen YouTube und andere Firmen unter die Klausel für "sichere Häfen" im Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA). Für Webhosts in Europa dagegen ist das Risiko viel größer, für die Taten von NutzerInnen belangt zu werden, bevor überhaupt eine Abmahnung erteilt wird.

  • Advies Duitse rechter versterkt groeiende kloof aansprakelijkheid van Amerikaanse en Europese web hosts

    By .Helka Lantto on Wednesday, 27 October 2010 - 6:17pm
    Message type:

    Duitse rechters hebben aangegeven dat ze misschien video hosting bedrijven zoals YouTube zullen dwingen om proactief op zoek te gaan naar muziekvideo's die inbreuk maken op auteursrecht en deze te verwijderen, in plaats dat houders van auteursrechten en de rechtenorganisaties eerst een verzoek moeten indienen vóórdat video's worden verwijderd.

    Dit komt bovenop de veroordeling van drie YouTube executives in Italië afgelopen februari, waar de uitspraak van het Italiaanse gerecht een duidelijke implicatie inhield dat elke gehoste video vooraf gescreend zou moeten worden.

    Hoewel de Duitse auteursrechtenorganisatie GEMA eind augustus het kort geding verloren heeft, waarin ze vroegen om de toegang tot bepaalde video's te blokkeren, is dit een schrale troost voor Duitse web hosts. De uitspraak werd gedaan op de grond dat een kort geding niet toepasselijk was, omdat GEMA al lange tijd wist dat de video's beschikbaar waren op YouTube. De rechter in de zaak heeft GEMA uitgenodigd een uitspraak in een bodemprocedure te vragen, met daarbij de mededeling dat zo'n aanvraag kans van slagen heeft. De rechter verklaarde dat "er goede redenen zijn te menen dat YouTube inderdaad een plicht heeft illegale uploads op te sporen."

    GEMA heeft begin oktober aangegeven dat zij van plan zijn een bodemprocedure te starten.

    Volgens sommige juridische waarnemers is het advies van de Duitse rechter het laatste in een reeks voorbeelden van een groeiende kloof tussen de manier waarop vergelijkbare wetten worden geïnterpreteerd in Europa en de VS, waar YouTube en andere bedrijven worden gedekt door de "veilige haven"-bepalingen van de Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Web hosts in Europa lijken een groter risico te lopen aansprakelijk te worden gesteld voor acties van gebruikers die plaatsvinden voordat ze een verzoek tot verwijdering ontvangen.

  • German court opinion reinforces growing gap between liability faced by US and European web hosts

    By .Helka Lantto on Wednesday, 27 October 2010 - 6:16pm
    Message type:

    Written by Tanaqui

    German courts have indicated that they may force video hosting companies such as YouTube to proactively search out and delete music videos that infringe copyright, rather than requiring copyright holders and rights collection agencies to submit takedown notices before videos are removed.

    This comes on top of the conviction last February of three YouTube executives in Italy where the ruling of the Italian court included a clear implication that every hosted video should be pre-screened.

    Although German rights collection agency GEMA may have lost an application for an emergency order at the end of August 2010 asking for access to certain videos to be blocked, this is small comfort for German web hosts. The ruling was made only on the basis that an emergency order in itself was inappropriate, as GEMA had known for a long time that the videos were available on YouTube. The presiding judge in the case invited GEMA to ask for a ruling in regular proceedings, indicating their claim was likely to be successful in that event. He is reported as stating that "There are some good reasons to think that YouTube indeed has some duty to take care of detecting illegal uploads."

    GEMA indicated at the start of October 2010 that it does plan to file a new suit.

    According to some legal observers, the opinion of the German court appears to be the latest of several examples of an emerging gap between the way similar laws are being interpreted in Europe and the US, where YouTube and other companies are covered by the "safe harbor" provisions of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA). Web hosts based in Europe appear to be at greater risk of being held liable for users' actions prior to receiving takedown notices.

  • Links Roundup for June 24, 2010

    By .fcoppa on Thursday, 24 June 2010 - 6:26pm
    Message type:

    Here's a roundup of stories that might be of interest to fans: news, blog posts, book reviews, lectures, and even video art!

    First up, here's a group of stories for vidders, about the direction YouTube is taking.

    * In the New York Times, we have, At YouTube, Adolescence Begins at 5, an article about YouTube's 5 year anniversary. Unfortunately, in this article "growing up" seems to mean "selling out", or at the very least, making YouTube a lot more like television and less like a home for user-generated content. "Once known primarily for skateboard-riding cats, dancing geeks and a variety of cute-baby high jinks, YouTube now features a smorgasbord of more professional video that is drawing ever larger and more engaged audiences."

    * Similarly, this article--YouTube's Top 100 By Type--defines YouTube's success by how many of its videos are professional and/or have ads on them, and also by the decline of user-generated content like vids. "Overall, YouTube is doing fairly well: although only 41.93% of the most popular videos have ads, that number is growing by 0.83% per month and both unofficial TV/movie clips and user-generated content are down." (emphasis mine)

    Next up, a couple of links that talk about the development of tools for what some people are calling "affirmative" fandom (which is creator-centered; vs. "transformational" fandom, which is community and fanworks-oriented):

    * The NYT did an article about Cambio, a new website/web video portal that bills itself as "your destination for original shows, specials and short videos featuring your favorite actors, musicians and athletes." It is also being billed as "a 'safe environment' [for artists and celebrities] to talk to fans"; what it purports to offer is direct access to artists and special content for fans. (The Jonas Brothers are partners in this enterprise and will be using Cambio to do direct outreach and marketing to their fans.)

    * Similarly, publisher Richard Nash, gave a talk on what he thinks the future of publishing will look like--and it looks a lot like parts of fandom. For example, Nash himself is starting a publishing business/social network called Cursor, which is described as as "a social approach to publishing that focuses on the establishment of powerful, self-reinforcing online membership communities made up of professional authors, reader members, and emerging writers."

    Other links include:

    * On BoingBoing, Cory Doctorow cited a LiveJournal post by bookshop in Pulitzer-winning fanfic: a non-exhaustive list, which sparked some intense debates as to the definition of fanfic.

    * The EFF's Fred von Lohmann reviews Adrian Johns' new book Piracy: The Intellectual Property Wars from Gutenberg to Gates. Quote: "Opposing the 'intellectual property defense industry' is not the same thing as opposing 'intellectual property.; Rather, it is about insisting on values like civil liberties, privacy, and autonomy, and not allowing antipiracy enforcement to trample them."

    * Lastly, we have a different kind of transformative work than those that we normally talk about here. In Transformation through YouTube, video artist Patrick Liddell uploads a video to YouTube, rips it, uploads it and rips it, until the sounds and image degrades. From his description: "An homage to the great Alvin Lucier, this piece explores the 'photocopy effect', where upon repeated copies the object begin to accumulate the idiosyncrasies of the medium doing the copying."

    We want your suggestions! If you know of an essay, video, article, event, or link you think we should know about you can submit it in three easy ways: comment on the most recent Link Roundup on LJ, IJ or DW, tag a link with "for:otw_news" on Delicious or give @OTW_News a shoutout on Twitter. Links are welcome in all languages!

    Submitting a link doesn't guarantee that it will be included in a roundup post, and inclusion of a link doesn't mean that it is endorsed by the OTW.

Pages

Subscribe to Intellectual Property