Tony Falzone is the Deputy General Counsel at Pinterest, Inc.
The Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School is a leader in the study of the law and policy around the Internet and other emerging technologies.
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.
Tony Falzone is the Deputy General Counsel at Pinterest, Inc.
Brett Frischmann’s expertise is in intellectual property and internet law. After clerking for the Honorable Fred I. Parker of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and practicing at Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering in Washington, DC, he joined the Loyola University Chicago law faculty in 2002. He has held visiting appointments at Cornell and Fordham.
Lauren is an experienced attorney, frequent speaker and start-up advisor who has worked in the field of Internet law and policy since 1995. She is the founder of BlurryEdge Strategies, a legal and strategy consulting firm located in San Francisco that advises technology companies and investors on cutting-edge legal issues.
There is one thing about the 9th Circuit’s decision in Kahle v. Gonzales that I could not find any discussion about – namely, the international copyright law implications of the issue. The basics first. Article 5(2) of the Berne Convention provides:
The enjoyment and the exercise of these rights shall not be subject to any formality
Though the Court acknowledged that there had been a change from an opt-in to an opt-out system of copyright, the court held that because Eldred had resolved a “similar” claim, it would not “ignore the clear holding of Eldred” (about, apparently, not the same claim, but a “similar” claim.)
From ALCEI - Electronic Frontiers Italy (www.alcei.org)
There has been wide reporting, in Italy and internationally, that an Italian court "ruled not-for-profit file-sharing legal". That statement is grossly overstated, if not completely wrong. The (dismal) state of
Italian "copyright" legislation remains, unfortunately, unchanged.
I attended a really fun reception last night at the fancy Hotel Vitale in San Francisco hosted by Harvard Law School's Berkman Center. One of the co-hosts was Pam Samuelson, that amazing law and technology professor at UC Berkeley whose work and writings are extremely important in the field of IP and internet rights.
During the reception, Pam was asked to tell us about the most exciting thing she's working on these days. Her answer explained that she'll be heading over to be a visiting professor at Harvard next year (which makes me a tiny bit sad because it means she won't be so close to us here in the Bay Area and I have this little irrational fear she may not come back - gasp!), and that her big project for the next 5 years is to fix the copyright act. Yes, that's right, Pam Samuelson's going to take on the the 200-plus page behemoth, which is filled with special interest carve outs, archane and sometimes seriously confusing language, and -- not unlike the tax code -- is simply unwieldy for something that so greatly impacts our rights to share knowledge, build culture, create beautiful art and astounding new technologies, and (simply) speak freely.
I think her project simultaneous fantastic and so needed on the one hand, and somewhat impossible on the other! And for that, I love that she's taking it on. We should give our support to Pam and this project, and pay close attention to how the parties who stand to gain/lose from changes get involved. Many voices in the debate will, I hope, lead to great results and powerful changes in our copyright laws.
"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."
For most of human history the essential nature of creativity was understood to be cumulative and collective. This notion has been largely forgotten by modern policies regulating creativity and speech. As hard as it may be to believe, the most valuable components of our immortal culture were created under a fully open regime as far as access to pre-existing expressions and reuse was concerned.
The Fair Use Project filed an amicus brief on behalf of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Public Knowledge in AP v. Meltwater.
We filed an amicus brief on behalf of the Electronic Frontier Foundation asking the First Circuit to affirm the district court’s reduced damages award in Sony v. Tenenbaum, a file-sharing case in which a jury originally ordered a college student to pay $675,000 for infringing copyright in 30 songs.
We filed an amicus brief in the Third Circuit on behalf of Brave New Films urging affirmance of the district court’s finding of fair use and rejection of plaintiff’s DMCA claims.
We filed an amicus brief in the Fourth Circuit in support of the Baltimore Ravens and the NFL urging the Fourth Circuit to grant rehearing or rehearing en banc, after a divided panel ruled that the Raven’s incidental use of a copyrighted logo in historical game films was not a fair use.
We defended a documentary filmmaker who was sued for copyright infringement for clips appearing in his documentary about Count Dante, an enigmatic, Chicago martial arts legend.
"Ask Andrew Bridges about government efforts to crack down on websites that post copyrighted material or to enlist Internet companies as copyright enforcers, and you may see his militant side. The Fenwick & West litigator is no fan of measures that restrict online expression in the name of intellectual property protection. And lately he's been winning those battles. After a Ninth Circuit panel ordered YouTube to take down an anti-Islamic video clip, Bridges fought the decision for clients including eBay Inc., Facebook Inc., Twitter Inc. and Yahoo Inc.
"David Levine, a law professor at Elon University, suggests that company executives work with IT staff to spot irregular computer use, which can flag things like flash drives going out the door. He also recommends other internal controls like limiting the distribution of sensitive documents to ensure information doesn’t lose its legal status as a trade secret.
MARIA A. PALLANTE
UNITED STATES REGISTER OF COPYRIGHTS AND DIRECTOR OF THE U.S. COPYRIGHT OFFICE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
United States House of Representatives
“THE REGISTER’S PERSPECTIVE ON COPYRIGHT REVIEW”
Affiliate Scholar Annemarie Bridy cited on the subject of DMCA reform on page 25 of the attached PDF.
"Google's program "has some terms that are favorable to Google, such as requiring an exclusive offer and agreeing that the offer won't serve as notice for willfulness purposes, but no one is being forced to offer their patents as part of this program," said Daniel Nazer, staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
The response likely "will be modest," he told the E-Commerce Times."
Golan v. Holder involves a challenge to the constitutionality of the 1994 Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA), which restored copyright in foreign works previously in the public domain under U.S. copyright law. The plaintiffs in the case have challenged the URAA as contravening both the "limited times" requirement and the First Amendment. In October 2011, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case and is expected to issue a ruling before June 2012.
The Symposium, co-sponsored by Stanford’s Center for Internet and Society, took place on Friday, February 10, 2012. Scholars and noted practitioners from across the country joined STLR to discuss current and emerging issues in First Amendment law and the Internet.
December 12, 2013 - Copyright and Fair Use Issues in the Visual Motion Arts
The song you sampled for an intro sequence that you don't have the license for-
The uncredited movie clips you inserted into a montage-
The image you pulled from social media-
You can use those in your production, because they're all covered by Fair Use ... right?
This week, David Levine interviews Daniel Nazer, a Staff Attorney on the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s intellectual property team, focusing on patent reform.
This week, David Levine interviews Prof. Victoria Stodden of Columbia University.
CIS Affiliate Scholar David Levine interviews Prof. Deven Desai of Thomas Jefferson Law School, on 3D printing.