SOPA/PIPA Copyright Bills Also Target American Sites
By Marvin Ammori • December 30, 2011 at 9:00 pm
A healthy copyright system must balance the need to provide strong economic incentives through exclusive rights with the need to protect important public interests like free speech and expression. Fair use is foundational to that balance. It's role is to prevent copyright from stifling the creativity it is supposed to foster, and from imposing other burdens that would inhibit rather than promote the creation and spread of knowledge and learning.
The Fair Use Project (FUP) was founded in 2006 to provide legal support to a range of projects designed to clarify, and extend, the boundaries of fair use in order to enhance creative freedom and protect important public rights. It is the only organization in the country dedicated specifically to providing free and comprehensive legal representation to authors, filmmakers, artists, musicians and other content creators who face unmerited copyright claims, or other improper restrictions on their expressive interests. The FUP has litigated important cases across the country, and in the Supreme Court of the United States, and worked with scores of filmmakers and other content creators to secure the unimpeded release of their work.
By Marvin Ammori • December 30, 2011 at 9:00 pm
By Marvin Ammori • December 8, 2011 at 12:07 pm
By Zohar Efroni • November 24, 2011 at 12:51 pm
Per today's ruling, injunctions against European ISPs requiring them to apply filtering tools that monitor traffic to prevent copyright infringement officially violate EU law. The Scarlet decision puts a major stick in the wheel of wholesale copyright holders fighting against file sharing activities. With the expected implementation of the ACTA in mind, this ruling by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) will likely affect both prospective copyright legislation in Europe and offensive strategies of rights holders in their operations against intermediaries. Read more » about The ECJ's Scarlet Decision: No Broad Filtering Duty for European ISPs
By Julie Ahrens • November 16, 2011 at 3:13 pm
Today Congress held hearings on the latest IP legislation, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). We are taking part in American Censorship Day to help spread the word and stop this bill. We’ve outlined five of the most important problems with SOPA.
1. SOPA violates due process. Under SOPA, any private copyright or trademark owner can cut-off advertising and payments to any website by alleging that the operator “avoid[ed] confirming a high probability” that “a portion” of its site is being used to infringe copyrights. Advertisers and payment companies (e.g. Visa, Mastercard, and PayPal) are then required to stop doing business with that site. It seems likely that content owners (or people merely claiming to be content owners) will often succeed in shutting down websites without ever going to court. The proposed legislation also gives the Attorney General and the Justice Department the power to shut down websites before they are actually judged infringing. Courts will be able to order any Internet service provider to stop recognizing an accused site immediately upon application by the Attorney General, after an ex parte hearing. By failing to guarantee the challenged websites notice or an opportunity to be heard in court before their sites are shutdown, SOPA violates due process. Read more: Letter to Congress from over 100 law professors techdirt explains that SOPA would create the Great Firewall of America.
Read more » about Stop Censorship: The Problems With SOPA"As Stacey Dogan noted in her recent review of Bob Bone’s Taking the Confusion Out of “Likelihood of Confusion”: Toward a More Sensible Approach to Trademark Infringement, trademark law is at a bit of a crossroads. Scholars increasingly question basic tenets of trademark law and seek explanations for our blinkered theories of trademarks. Among recent attempts at comprehensive trademark law frameworks, some are good, some great, some … not."
Read full Jotwell article. Read more » about Of Trademarks and Brands
The Fair Use Project filed an amicus brief on behalf of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Public Knowledge in AP v. Meltwater. Read more » about AP v. Meltwater Amicus Brief
We represented visual artist Shepard Fairey in connection with the AP’s claim that his iconic “Hope” poster in support of President Obama’s campaign infringes the AP’s copyrights. We represented Fairey because we believe his artistic transformation of a news photograph to convey a political message fell within the protection of the fair use doctrine and presented an important example of why fair use is essential for free expression. Read more » about Fairey v. The Associated Press
After the Estate of James Joyce refused to allow a scholar to quote Joyce in her book, we successfully defended her right under the fair use doctrine to use the quotes she needed to illustrate her scholarship. After we prevailed in the case, the Estate paid $240,000 of our client’s legal fees. Read more » about Shloss v. Estate of Joyce
After Original Talk Radio Network, the nationwide distributor of Michael Savage’s radio show, issued a takedown notice against a video critical of Savage’s portrayal of Muslims, we filed a lawsuit that convinced the company to withdraw its objections to our client’s film. Read more » about Brave New Films v. Savage
We filed an amicus brief on behalf of a group of library associations and others asking the Second Circuit to reverse a lower court’s injunction of the publication of 60 Years Later: Coming through the Rye an unauthorized story based on J.D. Salinger’s in Catcher In The Rye. Read more » about Salinger v. Colting, et al.
"According to Julie Ahrens, a lawyer who specializes in issues of copyright and fair use at the Center for Internet and Society at Stanford University, a photograph of an artwork could be considered a “derivative work,” which is “potentially a violation of the copyright holder.”" Read more » about Why Can’t We Take Pictures in Art Museums?
""It's likely a landmark decision on the issue of appropriation art and what you can do with the existing work," said Julie Ahrens, of the Stanford Law Center for Internet and Society." Read more » about Analysis: 'Landmark' ruling says commentary not needed for fair use defense
"“The law has never required the kind of licensing that people have assumed is necessary,” says Julie Ahrens, director of copyright and fair use at Stanford University’s Center for Internet and Society." Read more » about Feed Me, See More
CIS Director of Civil Liberties Jennifer Granick is interviewed in the PBS Show Constitution USA with Peter Sagal. Read more » about Constitution USA with Peter Sagal
For more information please visit STLR's website. Read more » about Copyright in the Digital Age - 16th Annual Stanford Technology Law Review Symposium
Please join us as we gather to remember Aaron Swartz on the evening of Thursday, January 24th.Four Factors In Search Of a Question: Anchoring Fair Use to Free Expression and Social Value Read more » about Four Factors In Search Of a Question: Anchoring Fair Use to Free Expression and Social Value
During late 2011 and January 2012, millions of people protested the passage of the controversial copyright bill the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in Congress. The protests culminated in the largest online protest in the history of the Internet, with web giant Wikipedia and thousands of other websites going black in a day of self-censorship. In a few short months, the protesters achieved something remarkable: they defeated money, politicians, Hollywood, and the copyright lobby, all in the name of a “free and open Internet.” This talk with Professor Edward Lee, explains these grassroots movements as a form of popular constitutionalism. Courts didn't define speech rights. People did. And, in the end, it was the people's view of free speech that carried the day. Read more » about CIS Speaker Series - Stopping SOPA: Copyright, Free Speech, and Popular Constitutionalism
November 6, 2012
The extent to which internet intermediaries such as Facebook and Google should be liable for unlawful content on the internet is currently facing a great deal of scrutiny in Europe. Like in the US, internet intermediaries in Europe are expected to assist in the prevention of copyright infringement. However, they do not have the wide protection against defamation and privacy claims provided by section 230 of the Communications Decency Act 1996 in the US. Over the last few years, they have therefore found themselves being named in lawsuits in respect of user-generated content. Read more » about Intermediary Liability on the Internet - Ashley Hurst - Audio
October 16, 2012
CIS Affiliate Scholar David Levine interviews Prof. of Virginia Law, co-author of The Knockoff Economy. Read more » about Prof. Chris Sprigman - Hearsay Culture - Show #173 - KZSU-FM
September 19, 2012
CIS Affiliate Scholar David Levine interviews Prof. Madhavi Sunder of UC Davis School of Law, author of From Goods to a Good Life: Intellectual Property and Global Justice. Read more » about Prof. Madhavi Sunder - Hearsay Culture - Show #172 - KZSU-FM
August 10, 2012
CIS Affiliate Scholar David Levine interviews Mike Masnick of Techdirt. Read more » about Mike Masnick - Hearsay Culture - Show #168 - KZSU-FM