copying
Latest
Stable Diffusion update removes ability to copy artist styles or make NSFW works
AI artwork generator Stable Diffusion has been updated with a bunch of new features -- but many users aren't happy.
UK music industry pushes for a new tax on CD copying
Before October 1st this year, you were probably a criminal. On that day, UK copyright law changed to include a private copying exception that, simply put, means you're allowed to copy media for your own personal use (not distribution, obviously). This is especially important when it comes to music. Although it might be hard to believe, if you've ever ripped a CD and moved the digital copies to an MP3 player or your phone, you were technically committing a crime.
Et tu, Lenovo? The blatant iPhone copying game continues
While Samsung may very well be the iPhone copier emeritus, there are some new kids on the block who are even more blatant and shameless in ripping off anything emanating out of Cupertino. Earlier this summer, we profiled Xiaomi, a consumer electronics company out of China whose products and advertising materials borrow far too liberally from the iPhone and the iPad. Somewhat bizarrely, Xiaomi CEO Lei Jun is an unabashed Steve Jobs fan who likes to trot out on stage wearing a black shirt and jeans and has, in the past, thrown up a "one more thing" slide during product presentations. Not to be outdone, Lenovo recently decided to enter the "let's copy the iPhone" game as well. And they're playing for keeps. Android Authority (via Gizmobic) points us to the Lenovo iPhone 6. Oh wait, my bad. It's actually the Lenovo s90 Sisley. Given the blatant copying going on here, it's no surprise that the s90 is only available for purchase in China. Take a closer look and you'll notice that those rounded icons bear a certain similarity to iOS. The Music and Photos icons are particularly egregious. Lenovo even went so far as to try and mimic the iPhone 6's wallpaper. Check out this photo comparison. But wait, there's more! Both Gizmobic and Android Authority have quite a few more photos highlighting the uncanny resemblance the s90 bears to the iPhone 6.
LG's new design patent looks awfully familiar
Note: This story mistakenly noted Samsung as the patent filer, not LG. Android phone manufacturers and Apple have a long and rocky relationship when it comes to design patents, which you'll no doubt be aware of if you're even casually interested in the world of smartphones. This week, LG scored an interesting design patent. For the next 14 years, LG owns the rights to this: Yes, the earphone is a bit higher and the camera on the rear is in a different spot than Apple has ever placed it, but there's only one thing that comes to mind when you see the front of that device. Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, right? [Photo credit: TeppoTK]
Samsung's defense against Apple patents begins with DiamondTouch table, LiveTile UI prior art
Samsung may have convinced Judge Koh to toss a few international handsets out of Apple's lawsuit, but the Korean firm still has Cupertino's patent licensing accusations to contend with. Their tactic? Convince the court that Apple's claim to the inventions are invalid, and that the technology was developed prior to the disputed patent's filing. It's called showing "prior art," and Sammy's done it before -- famously showing a scene from 2001: A Space Odyssey in an attempt to put Apple's iPad design claims to rest. Today's examples were more grounded in reality, focusing on debunking Cupertino's claim to the "bounce back" effect that happens when a user reaches the end of a page and common multitouch zoom / navigation gestures. Samsung pitted the famous "bounce back" feature against an old PocketPC interface called LaunchTile, which allowed users to navigate through 36 applications by zooming in and out and a panning across a grid-like "world view" of said apps. Movement between grids snap to each zone, marking the end of a page. Apple shot back, noting that LiveTile's snapping navigation didn't work on diagonals, and cited other differences as well. Samsung wasn't deterred, however, and brought out DiamondTouch, a projector based multitouch table that utilized both one touch scrolling and pinch-based zoom gestures. The table even takes aim at the aforementioned bounce-back patent with a technology called TableCloth, which bounces back images that are pulled off screen. DiamondTouch's creator, Adam Bogue, told the court that he had demoed the technology to Apple privately back in 2003, noting that it was also available to anyone who visited the Mitsubishi Electronic Research Laboratories' lobby. If the jury takes to Samsung's claims of prior art, it could severely cut Apple's claims against it. Even so, Cupertino's lawyers aren't going down without a fight, and still have a number of navigation and design claims that Samsung hasn't addressed. The two parties are expected to keep up the fight for about a week, we'll keep you posted on the inevitable revelations as they come.
Blu-ray video encryption cracked using $260 kit
When a master key for HDCP encryption surfaced last year, Intel hardly broke a sweat. It declared that nobody could use the key to unlock Blu-rays or other protected sources unless they got into the semiconductor business and "made a computer chip" of their own. Oh Mann, didn't they realize? That sort of language is like a red rag to a German post-grad, and now Ruhr University's Secure Hardware Group has produced the ultimate rebuttal: a custom board that uses a field programmable gate array (FPGA) board to sit between a Blu-ray player and TV and decode the passing traffic. Student price: €200, and no silly bodysuits required.
Samsung modifies Galaxy smartphones to satisfy Dutch court, plans to resume sales soon
Earlier this summer, a judge in The Netherlands ruled to ban sales of Samsung Galaxy S, S II and Ace smartphones, stating that the devices violated an Apple patent which deals with a "method of scrolling." Well, nearly two months have passed, and Samsung is just now getting around to releasing "upgraded" versions of the affected devices, presumably implementing a non-infringing scroll tool. A Samsung spokesman told Reuters that the three phones will "shortly be available for sale," neglecting to provide an exact release date -- so we wouldn't suggest lining up to get your Galaxy S II fix just yet. This small victory is only the latest in the Apple / Samsung lawsuit saga, which has created quite a stir in a handful of courts around the world. We have yet to hear about a solution to the Galaxy Tab 10.1 ban in Australia, for example, where fingers are being pointed in every direction.
Netherlands judge rules that Samsung Galaxy S, S II violate Apple patents, bans sales (updated)
A judge in The Hague just issued a ruling in Apple's patent infringement case against Samsung, prohibiting "the marketing of Samsung smartphones Galaxy S, S II and Ace for violation of Apple Inc. EP 2,059,868." In an official press release, the court explains that The Hague judge ruled to "ban trading of Samsung smartphones Galaxy S, S II and Ace," adding that Samsung also violated other did not violate Apple patents with its Galaxy Tab 10.1 and 10.1v. The judge determined that Samsung violated patent 2,059,868, which deals with "method of scrolling," but did not infringe 2,098,948 for "recording a flag in connection with multiple screen taps," or 1,964,022, which relates to dragging a slider to unlock the phone. We haven't been able to confirm, but from an online translation it appears that The ban will remain in effect through begin on October 13th. Hit up the source link for the full 65-page verdict (in Dutch). Update: A dutch IP attorney has pointed out that the judge has ruled patent 1,964,022 to be null and void, meaning Apple can no longer make claims in the Netherlands based on this patent. The judge also found that Samsung did not infringe on patent 2,098,948. The infringement of 2,059,868 does not affect the Galaxy Tab 10.1. (Correction: the main patent in question is 2,059,868 not 2,058,868.) Update 2: According to Tweakers.net, Samsung says that it will replace the software that infringes on Apple's patent (the Gallery application, specifically), which should allow it to continue to sell the phones. Notably, that Gallery application is the standard Android one used in Android 2.3, which also explains why the Galaxy Tab 10.1 is not affected by this ruling. Less clear is what the ruling means for other Android phones that use the same application. Update 3: Samsung Mobile's Kim Titus released the following statement: Today's ruling is an affirmation that the GALAXY range of products is innovative and distinctive. With regard to the single infringement cited in the ruling, we will take all possible measures including legal action to ensure that there is no disruption in the availability of our GALAXY smartphones to Dutch consumers. This ruling is not expected to affect sales in other European markets. Samsung has a proud history of innovation in the mobile industry. We will continue our plans to introduce new products and technologies that meet and exceed consumer expectations. And we will defend our intellectual property rights through the ongoing legal proceedings around the world. [Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
UK set to legalize CD and DVD copying for personal use
The fact that it hasn't technically been legal may not have stopped many folks in the UK from ripping their CDs all these years, but it looks like there may soon be a tad less anarchy involved in that process. Reuters is reporting that the British government will announce tomorrow that it plans to legalize the copying of CDs and DVDs onto computers or portable media players for personal use -- a move that will bring it up to speed with most other European countries (and the US and Canada). Of course, the key words there are "personal use." You still won't be legally allowed to share that music over the internet after you copy it without permission, and it's not yet clear how the new rules will apply to DVDs (or Blu-rays) with copy protection measures -- although the British Video Association unsurprisingly doesn't seem too pleased with the changes regardless, calling them "extremely damaging."
Apple sues Samsung: here's the deal
So we all know that Apple's suing Samsung alleging myriad IP infringements, but you may not know what all the fuss is about. On one hand, the lawsuit is surprising because Apple gets much of the goodies it needs to build its iconic iPhones, iPads, and Macs from Sammy, and common sense dictates that you don't bite the hand that feeds you. On the other hand, however, folks in Cupertino don't take too kindly to copycats, and while it's hard to put a dollar value on the brand equity Apple currently enjoys, this lawsuit shows it's valuable enough for Apple to risk upsetting its relationship with Samsung and jeopardizing its supply chain. Having given the court docs a good read, here's our rundown of what's going on. According to Apple's complaint, phones from Samsung (particularly the Galaxy S variety) and its Galaxy Tab are eroding the efficacy of Apple's carefully crafted brand. That brand is built, in no small part, upon the trade dress (aka the appearance and packaging) of its iDevices and its trademarked iOS icons, and Apple has spent over two billion dollars on advertising from 2007-2010 to stake out a little space in everyone's brain that associates the iPhone's looks and its progeny's derivative forms with Apple. It's worked quite well too, as Apple revealed (for the first time) in its complaint that it has sold over 60 million iPod touches, 108 million iPhones, and 19 million iPads total. Problem is, Apple views the Galaxy devices, their TouchWiz UI, and packaging -- with their Apple-esque appearance -- as illegal infringers on its hard-earned mental real estate, and it's suing Sammy to stop the squatting and pay for its IP trespassing ways. Of course, Apple isn't just dragging Samsung to court for cashing in on the iPhone image in our hearts and minds -- Jobs and company have accused Sammy of infringing several of their patents, too. Apple asserts that TouchWiz and the Galaxy S infringe upon its iOS home screen and iPhone 3G design patents. Additionally, the complaint says Samsung has run afoul of several Apple utility patents for: the iOS instant messaging interface, the "bounce back" effect you get upon scrolling too far in a list or window, control and status widgets, UI status windows that disappear a set time after being opened, and scrolling and ellipse multi-touch gesture recognition. In light of these alleged mass IP infringements, Apple's asking the court for preliminary and permanent injunctions to take Samsung's Galaxy devices off the market, in addition to the usual request for punitives, triple damages and lost profits. We've already heard that Samsung will "respond strongly" to Apple's show of legal force, but time will tell if Sammy's strong response comes in, or out of court. Those looking for a full breakdown of Apple's legal claims can hit the more coverage link below.
Apple sues Samsung for 'copying' the iPhone and iPad
Whoa! In the world of big-time lawsuits, this must be just about the biggest. The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Apple has sued Samsung Electronics for copying "the look and feel" of its iPad tablet and iPhone smartphone. This relates to the Samsung Galaxy S 4G, which bears more than a passing resemblance to the iPhone 3G / 3GS models, and the slightly less obvious Epic 4G, Nexus S, and Galaxy Tab (presumably the older 7-inch model, since the newer ones aren't out yet) devices. The claim for intellectual property infringement is phrased as follows: "Rather than innovate and develop its own technology and a unique Samsung style for its smart phone products and computer tablets, Samsung chose to copy Apple's technology, user interface and innovative style in these infringing products." The lawsuit was filed in the Northern District of California on Friday and seeks injunctions against Samsung, damages (both actual and punitive), and a finding that the infringement was willful. Lest we forget, the rarest outcome in such legal tussles is for an actual judgment to actually be handed down, so the greatest likelihood is that this will just lead to another round of grudging handshakes and licensing going one way with money going the other way, but still, it's fun to see the big dogs barking at each other. Another aspect to these proceedings that shouldn't be overlooked is that, on the software front, they boil down to iOS versus Android (again). When Apple calls Samsung uninventive in its user interface, it's talking more about Android's perceived imitation of the iPhone's interface than whatever TouchWiz tweaks Samsung has slapped on top. And hey, if you're going to sue Google indirectly, you can't leave a major player like Samsung outside the courtroom, it just wouldn't be fair.
The Lawbringer: Scope of copyrights
Welcome to the Lawbringer, WoW.com's weekly look at the intersection of law and the World of Warcraft. I'm a newly minted J.D. acting as your crossing guard. Greetings from the other side of graduation! The sun is shining, tons of Cataclysm spoilers await and now I don't have to arrange my WoW-ing and writing around my study schedule. Given that, it's time to get back into our examination of copyright law. Two weeks ago, we looked at what can get a copyright, namely: literary works; musical works and accompanying words; dramatic works and accompanying music; pantomimes and choreography; pictorial, graphical and sculptural works; motion pictures and other audiovisual works; sound recordings; and architectural works. But knowing what can be covered by a copyright doesn't explain what a copyright gives an author. A copyright is actually a bundle of separate rights: right to make copies right to distribute copies right to create derivative works right to perform or display right to anticircumvention of the measures taken to prevent copying moral rights, including rights of attribution and the right to avoid mutilation
CEPro breaks down Real and Kaleidescape cases, uncovers more questions
It's been a rough week for DVD copying services from Real and Kaleidescape, and public understanding of the whole DVD copying mess hasn't been spared. People like to watch DVDs and lawyers like to get paid, however, so we're willing to bet there's more to come. CEPro has put together a breakdown of the issues at hand, which not only makes for some good reading but also shows just how far from any real clarity we are. Whether it's legal to make bit-for-bit copies, but illegal to view them; legal to use copying tools, but illegal to produce them; or just plain mean to do something Hollywood doesn't want you to, consumers are going to push for media convenience. We're still hoping Blu-ray's Managed Copy gives us enough wiggle room on our HD digital handcuffs, but sadly, it seems like DVD fans can pick between taking up residence in legal limbo while the courts struggle to catch up with tech or just strip the CSS from discs and get on with their lives.
Metaforic unveils new anti-copying measures for DS games
Metaforic's Andrew Mclennan, a former game developer frustrated by piracy, spoke to Gamasutra about a new technology his company has created to reduce copying of DS games. Nintendo's tactic so far has been to try to stop the sale of the R4 flashcart in Japan and other countries, but the company is now working with Metaforic to attack the problem from a different angle.Metaforic's MetaFortress technology, to be used in games by Nintendo and six other publishers starting this year, uses code stored in the actual game that detects the patching used by flashcarts, and then disables the ROM. "We take any DS game and inject a security scheme into the game itself," Mclennan told Gamasutra. "It turns each game into its own security system. Every time we apply it to a different game, it's a different security system."Though he admits that the software could be hackable eventually, it would require a separate effort for each individual game ROM. "We add so much security to it that it will take a very long time to hack." Mclennan claims that even flashcart firmware patches will be unable to neutralize MetaFortress, though he didn't specify why. Though Mclennan thinks flashcarts should be illegal, he "sympathizes" with the homebrew community. It wasn't his goal, but disabling flashcart-based piracy at the software level obviates the need for anti-flashcart legislation, which could be good news for homebrew fans.
Study finds that one-third of consumers copy DVDs
'Round these parts, we prefer to read the fine print first, so it should be noted that none other than Macrovision -- you know, the firm that purchased the now-cracked BD+ DRM scheme for $45 million last year -- financed this here study. According to poll results from US and UK consumers, around 1 in 3 individuals admitted to "making copies of pre-recorded DVDs in the past 6 months, up over a quarter from the previous year's study." Predictably, males aged 18 to 24 were most likely to wear an eye patch and own a DVD burner (if you catch our drift), and while revenue loss due to illegal copying is certainly a valid concern, researchers did find that 62% of American respondents (and 49% in the UK) were duping flicks they already owned. Arrr![Image courtesy of George Dillon]
Managed Copy to be sorely absent from finalized AACS specifications?
It's sad, really. Nearly three full years ago we were attempting to curb our enthusiasm as we heard that Managed Copy could be a mandatory aspect of Blu-ray Discs. Fast forward to the present, and we're hearing the brilliant technology may not even make the cut for the finalized AACS specifications. According to Consumer Electronics Daily, the so-called "cornerstone of the AACS content protection system" may not ever become a reality, as the final AACS specs -- which are due to (finally) be wrapped up this summer -- aren't likely to include MC. As expected, the issue here seems to circle around content licensing, with studios "not always having the content rights to allow for a Managed Copy." Finally, a decent idea in the DRM realm, and it could quite possibly remain just an idea forever.
Found Footage: CNN asks Bill Gates about copying Mac OS X
Who's copying who in terms of OS design is quite the topic for a long session of coffee talk, but CNN recently put Mr. Gates on the hot seat by tossing him an on-air zinger. Currently, Bill is on a media blitz to help promote this month's release of Windows Vista. He was on the Daily Show Monday night (check out the re-dux Bill Gates Crash they did for a laugh too), and in this embedded clip, CNN seems to surprise Bill with a question about Vista's resemblance of Mac OS X. While Mr. G did offer some good points in his rebuttal, this seems like it might have been an unexpected curve ball during what I'm sure Microsoft was hoping to be a routine promo interview.[via digg]
iPod as a catalyst for DMCA reform?
CNET News has a really interesting perspective piece highlighting the video iPod's potential for being a catalyst for DMCA reform, specifically: the (outlandish) portion that makes it illegal to sell or distribute DVD-ripping software.The idea behind the article is that, until now, these measures of the DMCA haven't really hit the radar of an audience outside the comparatively small segment of digital-rights advocates. Declan McCullagh, the articles author, believes that the video iPod could finally be the spark large enough to get a much greater portion of consumers interested in (and angry about) the non-DVD-ripping limits on today's software. While McCullagh mentions a few DMCA-reform bills that are already floating around, he's also quick to point out that none of them, at present, have a very bright future.The video iPod, according to McCullagh's logic, might be able to help all of this. With its wide popularity, he thinks more and more users are going to start questioning why it's so easy for iTunes to rip a CD to their library (and iPod), and yet the software balks at a DVD movie. Yes - before you start firing up the comment form, there are still ways of getting a DVD off a plastic disc and onto your favorite media player, iPod or otherwise. But for the greater community of users out there, DVD ripping is still a thing of mystery and magic.I recommend you check out the full article as I think it's a really interesting read, but there's one thing I want to add to the discussion; a factor that neither the industry nor these politicians seem to examine: price. I wholeheartedly believe that if these companies cleaned all of their "market research" and "value perception" statistics out of their ears, they would realize that people are stealing content because they know the providers are taking them for a ride - and they won't put up with it anymore. Everyone knows CDs cost pennies on the dollar, and DVDs cost even less than VHS tapes to produce, yet they retail for a far higher price. The rampant (and as-yet unstoppable) success off the iTMS is real world proof that people will pay for the content, maybe even more content, as long as it has a fair price.But alas, as with all other political affairs, our ability to copy DVDs that we own will only change at the speed of bureaucracy.
