copyright
Latest
US Copyright Office grants abandonware rights
Here's something abandonware enthusiasts can be thankful for: the Library of Congress yesterday approved six exemptions to US copyright. The one most pertinent to gamers is that, for archival purposes, copy protection on software no longer being sold or supported by its copyright holder can be cracked. What does this mean? Well, those retro games -- classic or otherwise -- that you can't seem to find anywhere can now be preserved without fear of ramifications. Although it is still unlawful to distribute the old games, free or otherwise, rarely do any abandonware cases go to court. The ruling is more symbolic than anything, but a step in the right direction. Other rulings involved the rights of consumers to crack cell phone software locks for use on other carriers, the rights of educators to make compilations of DVD scenes, and the rights of blind people to use third-party software in order to read copy-protected electronic books. These rulings come as clarifications of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). All new rules take effect on Monday and last for three years.
Got ripped tunes on your iPod? Go directly to jail, mate
Australia's new copyright bill looks like it could soon be causing sleepless nights for anyone that owns an iPod or other digital audio player if its enacted in its current form, with strict limitations that could seemingly affect individuals whether they know they're infringing on copyright or not. Under the harshest penalty, The Sydney Morning Herald Reports, an individual can face up to five years in jail and a fine of AUD$65,000 if he/she possesses "a device, intending it to be used for making an infringing copy of a work or other subject-matter." What's more, under "strict liability provisions", you can be hit with a $6,600 fine or ticketed by police on the spot to the tune of $1320 simply for possessing infringing material, even if you didn't know you were violating copyright. While there were recently exceptions made to permit CD ripping, even those are apparently too limiting to be workable, according to Intellectual Property Research Institute associate director Kim Weatherall, permitting just one "main copy" of a CD -- meaning that you couldn't have a copy on both your iPod and computer. In related news, none other than Bill O'Reilly recently came out against the iPod, and he's got more problems with it than copyright infringement. On his radio show last week, O'Reilly said that he doesn't own an iPod and would never "wear" one, adding that (also referring to his earlier comments the PS3) "if this is your primary focus in life - the machines... it's going to have a staggeringly negative effect, all of this, for America." Some Americans, it would seem, disagree.Read - The Sydney Morning Herald, "The $65,000 question: do you own an iPod?"Read - Think Progress, "O'Reilly: iPods Are Endangering America"[Via Digg]
MPAA strikes again, says transporting DVDs to iPods is wrong
We don't seeing anything with helping a man out, or cutting him a sweet deal if he picks up a bundle of goods, but apparently the MPAA isn't down with companies loading the DVDs that consumers purchase onto their iPods as a friendly convenience. In another round of studios forcing consumers to purchase content multiple times for no good reason at all, Paramount Pictures has filed a lawsuit against the all but helpless Load 'N Go Video, which provided customers picking up an iPod and a few DVDs with a converting service to get flicks onto their handheld as a thank you for their business. According to the suit, the actual ripping of the DVD is illegal under the almighty DMCA, making the entire process illegal, fair use or not. Evidently selling millions of copies of Mission: Impossible III isn't good enough, as it appears that customers will be asked to shell out multiple times for the same (admittedly subpar) content. While pirating copies for personal gain is certainly aggravating the law, transcoding content for personal use sure seems harmless to us, but you'll have an exceedingly difficult time convincing Hollywood of that.
Los Angeles-area Boy Scouts can earn "activity patch" in copyright
Los Angeles-area Boy Scouts (this author used to be among them) will now be able to receive an "activity patch" in respecting copyrights. Different from a merit badge, The Associated Press reports that "an activity patch is not required to advance in the Scouts. Instead, they are awarded for various recreational and educational activities, such as conservation or volunteering at a food bank." Scouts will get a primer in copyright law, will have to identify five types of copyright, and will get to visit a movie studio to learn about "how many people can be harmed by film piracy," as defined by the MPAA. Boing Boing also adds that a movement is underway to educate the Los Angeles Area Council about their concerns of potentially pushing the MPAA's agenda. Jay Neely, an Eagle Scout (as is this author), writes on Boing Boing: "If it's as one-sided or erroneous as your post worries it will be, I'd like to get other current or former scouts to take part in a concerted effort to write the Los Angeles Area Council with our concerns." So basically, this ain't over yet, Hollywood.[Thanks, Rollins]Read - The Associated PressRead - Boing Boing
Blizzard 1, BC rumor sites 0
The pluralization is a bit pre-emptive here, as only one site I know of has had its contents pulled offline due to Blizzard's requests. That site, the Caverns of Time, was a great compilation of rumors and occasionally legitimate information about the upcoming expansion (the screenshot above, pulled from the site, was obviously not an accurate representation of the druid changes). They've received notice from Blizzard giving them 48 hours to remove contents of the site or else face "formal action," and they seem to have complied. You can check the site, still, for a copy of what I assume is Blizzard's complaint. Ah well -- I'm sure three sites will spring up tomorrow to replace it, thus providing us a steady stream of interesting Burning Crusade gossip!
With "pod" on lockdown, Apple goes after "podcast"
Now that Apple's lawyers have scared the pants off of small entrepreneurs selling products like the Profit Pod and TightPod -- items that have nothing to with portable audio in any way, mind you -- it seems that the next targets are companies that have the audacity to use the word "podcast" in their names. Wired's Listening Post blog is reporting that Steve's legal eagles have sent one of those scary cease and desist letters to a company called Podcast Ready, whose premier product, myPodder, gives users an automated way to download 'casts to their portable devices. CEO Russel Holliman claims that he'd consider changing the name of the program if necessary, but seems to be justifiably reticent about rebranding his entire business, considering the fact that "podcast" may not be "owned" by Apple nor even a derivative of "iPod" in the first place. Robert Scoble -- whose own company, PodTech, may be at risk in this witch hunt -- has weighed in on the issue by suggesting that the tech community as a whole adopt other terms like "audiocast" and "videocast" (or alternately, "audcast" and "vidcast") to describe this type of content, while other folks feel that fighting Apple and generating a ton of negative press for Cupertino is the best solution. Our take? Apple should be happy that its golden goose is getting so much free publicity, and if it isn't, we know of several companies that probably wouldn't mind if zencast, zunecast, or sansacast became the preferred terminology.Update: BBHub's own Russell Shaw delves into this issue a little further over at ZDnet, and finds that Apple is having trouble getting certain iPod-related phrases trademarked, including the word "iPodcasting."Read- Apple's nastygramRead- Scoble's take[Via calacanis.com]
iTunes to allow video burning soon?
I used the question mark because nothing is set in stone here, but TUAW reader Ann-CA tipped us off to a report at the DVD Newsroom that Hollywood might actually be close to lifting some of their over-the-top restrictions on DVD burning. This slightly loosened grip on their content could allow for things like DVD burning kiosks (it better be a darn fast burner), and it could also give the green light to vendors like the iTunes Music Store to allow burning of purchased videos.The panel in charge of making and (finally) rewriting these rules is called the DVD Copy Control Association, according to DVD Newsroom. This DVDCCA is currently working on licensing the encryption technology (Content Scrambling System, or: CSS - nothing to do with web design) to digital distribution services, which is the key to allowing video burning.No ETA is offered on when these rewritten rules could see the light of day, or when video burning could arrive in the iTMS. If Hollywood's reaction times of the past are any indication (and I genuinely hope they aren't), however, we might all be using 7th or 8th gen iPods before we can watch iTMS video on something besides Apple-branded devices.
ITC initiates Apple probe at Creative's behest
In a move that comes as a complete surprise considering the history between their two companies, Creative CEO Sim Wong Hoo has reportedly telephoned Apple CEO Steve Jobs to officially withdraw his firm's pending lawsuits and congratulate Mr. Jobs on the iPod's overwhelming victory in the marketplace. Yeah right, like that really happened; actually, the bad blood between the world's number one and two DAP manufacturers continues to flow unabated, with Wednesday seeing Creative move one step closer to the permanent cease and desist order it's seeking against the iPod, thanks to a probe intiated by the US International Trade Commssion. The ITC agreed to look into's Creative's complaint that several iPod models violate its Zen patents, which was the impetus for Apple filing two countersuits of its own. A ruling on the complaint is not anticipated for at least twelve months, during which time we can expect Apple to sell a lot more digital audio players than Creative, who will probably have to shift even more of its R&D budget to the overworked legal department.
Apple files another patent suit against Creative
Not content to merely hit back at Creative with one patent suit in exchange for being dragged into court over possible interface patent infringements, Apple has thrown down another lawsuit to make 'em really sorry. Word on the playground says Creative won't even be invited to Apple's birthday party. But as much of a tantrum as it looks like, leveraging their considerable IP on interface design might be Apple's best shot at getting through their legal woes, and they sure seem to be taking it. The new suit refers to three patents regarding icon use, and displaying and editing data. Apple is also asking for cash damages, a court order to stop Creative from further infringement and a block on imports of Creative's current players. We're pretty sure the prior meaning of "Zen" got lost somewhere along the way.[Via iLounge]
IPac sends iPods to Senators
We have to admit that we didn't really think they'd be able to pull it off, and we're still not sure this is going to win any hearts and minds, but the intellectual property mavens over at IPac have managed to send their first batch of iPods to members of the US Senate. The first 12 Senators to receive iPods include both Republicans and Democrats, and were apparently chosen based on committee assignments and legislation they've sponsored. Recipients include Republican Gordon Smith of Oregon, who is helping to draft Broadcast Flag legislation, Democrat Ben Nelson of Nebraska who "asked good questions" at recent Broadcast Flag hearings, and Republican John Ensign of Nevada, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Technology, Innovation, and Competitiveness. Each iPod was preloaded with public domain and Creative Commons-licensed content, including text, music, photos and a video of Lawrence Lessig discussing the importance of a progressive approach to intellectual property. We'll have to check back with the Senators in a month and find out if they've actually watched or listened to any of this -- of if they've handed off the iPods to interns and grandkids, who've refilled them with the latest from the Pussycat Dolls and Kelly Clarkson. [Via iLounge]
Newly proposed French law does not penalize Apple
First off, I would like to note that this post is an opinion piece, and though it contains facts, the opinions contained therein are definitely biased towards open source, open standards, the freedom of software programmers, and technological innovation.France's Assemblé Nationale voted in yesterday evening the DADVSI, a rather hideous proposal which will most likely become law when France's Sénat deems it constitutional and President Chirac signs it. Both of the latter are likely as the president is of the same majority right party (UMP) as the Assemblé Nationale. The New York Times (and Slashdot) have noted incorrectly that the law will contain clauses for interoperability required of iTunes and iPods, but those amendments did not make it into the final proposal voted on Thursday night. Read on for a breakdown of the law as it currently awaits, almost certain, approval.
Apple sued for iTunes interface
Lately it seems like filing suit against Apple is quite in fashion. Today I read that Contois Music Technology is seeking damages against Apple for alleged patent violations in the iTunes Music Store. The suit is seeking monetary compensation and requests that Apple stop distributing copies of iTunes. According to Apple Insider, Contois Music Technology claims that "...19 interface aspects of the iTunes software...are in direct violation of Contois' patent. These areas include iTunes' menu selection process to allow the user to select music to be played, the ability of the software to transfer music tracks to a portable music player, and search capabilities such as sorting music tracks by their genre, artist and album attributes."It feels like every time I turn around someone is suing Apple. What's going on?[Via AppleInsider]
