Stanford Center for Internet and Society

News in the Internet radio cases:

As we expected, the Librarian of Congress handed down an Order on Friday denying Live365's and Collegiate Broadcasters Inc's Motions for Stay of the Librarian's Order setting royalty rates for webcasting. CIS immediately filed papers in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals seeking a Stay from that Court. Today CIS continued its filing frenzy, preparing briefs and supporting documents supporting Emergency Motions for Stay.

Rumors are flying about who in the Senate killed the bill offering an alternative payment scheme for some small webcasters- was it Jesse Helms or Diane Feinstein? Either way, the bill may resurface when Congress returns.

Eldred Transcripts available here.

Clinic Asks Court to Award SLAPP Fees After "Doe" Case Dismissed

Today, Cyberlaw Clinic student Erica Platt filed the Appellant's Opening Brief in Ampex v. Doe. Ampex filed a defamation suit in California against an anonymous former employee. The Cyberlaw Clinic challenged the suit under California's Anti-SLAPP statute. Rather than litigate the motion, Ampex dismissed the suit and refiled in New York, which has a much narrower anti-SLAPP statute. The appeal asserts that the court should grant the employee his attorney's fees to dissuade Ampex and others from filing meritless cases in the California courts just to determine an anonymous speaker's identity, then dismissing.

CIS SUPPORTS WEBCASTERS
Files motion with US Copyright Office to stay Royalty fees

On Friday, two briefs authored by the Center for Internet and Society were filed with the Copyright in support of motions to stay the Librarian of Congress's Final Rule and Order on webcasting royalties. Under the Final Rule, webcasters must pay royalties for all their sound recording transmissions using the Internet from 1998 through summer 2002 on October 20th. The royalty rates announced June 20 are prohibitively high, and have already caused thousands of Internet radio stations to close their doors. Check out the Save Our Streams webpage for more information about the devastating impact of the royalty rates on college radio.

*** NOTE NEW DATE ***

Webcast and Discussion of Stanford Professor Lessig and Radin's Presentations

October 9-10 Catholic University in Washington DC hosted a symposium in conjunction with the Eldred arguments. Stanford Professors Larry Lessig and Margaret Jane Radin presented papers at the event. The entire event was archived.

This Tuesday October 15 at 3:30, CIS will broadcast each Professor's talk back to back in room 230 at the Law School, followed by a discussion of the two papers led by CIS Asst Director Lauren Gelman. Students, faculty, and the public are invited to the law school for the event.

Some new Web links

Catholic University Symposium on Intellectual Property Issues archive of Professor Lessig's and Professor Radin's presentatons.

CIS Brief in the replay TV case now available here.

October 9, 2002-- Findlaw Q&A Features CIS' Lauren Gelman on Eldred and the Bookmobile.

Findlaw Q&A Features CIS' Lauren Gelman on Eldred and the Bookmobile

In this Q&A FindLaw columnist Julie Hilden asked ten written questions to Lauren Gelman who explains the issues in the Supreme Court case of Eldred v. Ashcroft, which concerns copyright extension legislation, and was argued today, October 9 by CIS Executive Director Larry Lessig. She also discusses a creative form of protest against copyright extension: a

European Patent Office
Prosecution Overview: Prosecuting Complex Specifications and 'Written Description' Concerns

Wednesday Oct 9

6:00 p.m. => reception
7:00 p.m. => panel
Room 80, Moot Court Room

Examiners from the European Patent Office (EPO) provide a brief, general overview of European patent prosecution, followed by a focused discussion of two topics that are of particular relevance to U.S. patent practitioners filing and prosecuting patent applications in the EPO: (i) how the EPO views and deals with complex specifications having multiple independent claims with distinct points of novelty; and (ii) how the EPO applies its substantive "written description" standards under EPC Article 123.

CIS Files Amicus Brief in Replay TV Case

The entertainment companies are seeking a broad court order prohibiting EFF attorneys from reviewing -- or using in any way during the case -- the vast majority of the documents the court has ordered the companies to provide as part of the usual legal discovery process. The companies claim that EFF is a "competitor" with Hollywood because of public statements about copyright law policy and advocacy to Congress on pending and current technology legislation, including the proposed Consumer Broadband Digital Television Promotion Act.

Today CIS and other Amici filed a brief arguing that public advocacy organizations like EFF and CIS frequently litigate, make public statements about the law and advocate for its change, and that if the entertainment companies win, it will prevent these organizations from representing clients in the future.