Two People Can Have The Same Idea... It's Not Necessarily 'Theft', Infringement Or Plagiarism

from the creativity-knows-no-bounds dept

Someone who prefers to remain anonymous alerts us to the fact that some Icelandic movie producers are apparently furious and considering a lawsuit because they claim an episode of the TV show Heroes "stole" a scene (yes, just a scene) from a movie they produced. The link above has clips of both scenes, and there's simply no case at all here should they sue (and hopefully they won't). You see various lawsuits all the time with people claiming they came up with some generic concept for a TV show or movie, but it never sticks. Lots of people have the same basic ideas. Copyright infringement, on the other hand, requires actual copying of the specific content. Not just the general idea. Yet, if you watch these two clips, they're only loosely similar. They both involve a blonde-haired woman (who is clearly not a comic book fan), applying for a job in a comic book shop. That's about where the similarities end.

But, once again, this is indicative of the culture that we've created in this world with over-aggressive expansion of intellectual property laws, where people really do think that ideas are ownable, and as long as they were "first" no one else can possibly have a similar idea.

Filed Under: heroes, infringement, plots

Yes, Let's Create A Real Day Of Sharing

from the and-show-musicians-how-it-works dept

Shaun alerted us to an article in the CS Monitor about a Hollywood composer, Richard Gibbs, who is sarcastically proposing an international "Day of Sharing." It's not what you might think it is. Rather than suggesting a day to show how sharing is a good thing, Gibbs is simply showing his own ignorance of the difference between scarce and infinite goods. That's because his "Day of Sharing" is a recommendation that people steal (yes, steal!) physical things. He claims that this will show people that sharing music is stealing -- but, of course, he's wrong. Making a copy of an infinite good is entirely different than taking a scarce good away from someone. Most people who think about this for more than a few minutes tend to get that -- though, obviously, some are a bit slower. The very fact that more and more musicians have learned not just how to make money but to thrive while encouraging people to share their music suggests that it's not stealing at all. It's simply a business model issue, with Mr. Gibbs being unwilling to adjust. Also, amusingly, either he or the author of the article seems to think that eMusic is a file sharing site -- complaining about it as one of the "sources of free music" apparently unaware that eMusic is a paid music site, and probably the most successful service after iTunes.

However, if he wants a "Day of Sharing," perhaps we should give it to him. On the day he's chosen as his Day of Sharing, November 29, 2009 (the day after Thanksgiving) we should all send him copies of free, public domain or Creative Commons-licensed music from musicians who actually have an open mind on this issue and who encourage sharing, knowing that, with the right business model, it actually helps them tremendously. That would be a true Day of Sharing and would perhaps show Mr. Gibbs that perhaps things aren't so bad as he thinks they are.

Update: Fantastic idea from the comments: "We should all dress like Richard Gibbs and then send him pictures showing how we stole his clothes." Brilliant.

Filed Under: copyright, day of sharing, infringement, music, richard gibbs, sharing

Once Again, Apple's 200 iPhone Patents Don't Stop Others From Claiming Infringement

from the no-surprise dept

You may recall that Steve Jobs proudly hyped up the fact that Apple had filed over 200 patents on the technologies related to the iPhone, as if that showed how special it was. However, as we noted, those patents hardly stopped others from filing patent infringement lawsuits against Apple. In the latest case, we have a company named EMG Technology claiming the iPhone violates its recently issued patent on viewing a mobile website.

The patent appears to cover the process of reformatting a website so that it can be more easily viewed on a mobile browser -- something that's been done for ages, since well before this patent was originally filed in 2006. Of course, the priority date on this patent may actually go back to March of 2000, since it appears that various continuations were filed -- a common practice among patent holders to be able to later add changes to a patent's language to cover actual innovations that others came up with, but which the patent holder now wants credit, even if the original patent application wouldn't have covered that technology specifically.

Either way, even if you were to grant the (somewhat laughable) idea that this patent is valid, this case again shows why the patent system, as currently constructed, makes almost no sense. It's quite clear that Apple did not get it's idea for how the iPhone browser would work from EMG's patent. Instead, it came up with the concepts on its own, knowing that it would be a useful way of implementing a mobile browser. Yet, now, this third party who had nothing to do with Apple's innovations gets to demand money from Apple. That's not promoting the progress. It's promoting waste and inefficiency.

Filed Under: infringement, iphone, mobile browser, patents
Companies: apple, emg technology

Singers Sue Label For Failing To Sue Others For Infringement

from the sue-or-be-sued dept

Techdirt has covered many copyright lawsuits in the past, but this one is a bit different. Singers Daryl Hall and John Oates have filed a suit against their publisher, Warner/Chappell Music, who they claim have failed to enforce their rights and sue an unnamed singer-songwriter for infringement. They claim this is in breach of their contract, and are seeking the termination of said contract as well as unspecified damages.

Two things strike me about this lawsuit (although I'm not a lawyer and haven't seen the contract, so take it for what it's worth). First, though the alleged infringer isn't named, there seem to be two possibilities given they date it as 2006 - Nelly Furtado's Maneater was apparently influenced by it, and it was sampled by the Ying Yang Twins in their song Dangerous. I would have hoped both of these would be covered by fair use -- Oates in fact said of the former, "it's flattering and it makes you feel good because you think you've influenced a new generation of musicians." The second is that litigation should be a tool of last resort, and a lawsuit over someone not suing isn't exactly in line with that sentiment.

In fairness to Hall and Oates, their reasoning for the filing is that Warner/Chappell have failed to act over a "conflict of interest", which implies the publishers were benefiting from the alleged infringement and failing to pass that benefit on. Still, the idea that a label could be liable for failing to sue for copyright infringement is hardly likely to improve the litigation-happy nature of the industry at present.

Filed Under: copyright, daryl hall, infringement, john oates, lawsuit, royalties
Companies: warner chappell music

EA Sued For Copyright Infringement Over College Fight Song

from the what's-good-for-the-goose? dept

Isn't it funny how some of the strongest defenders of copyright seem to have other opinions when they're on the other side of the fence? EA, which has kicked up lots of dust about copyright and DRM and the importance of intellectual property, is now finding itself on the receiving end of a lawsuit from from a composer and song writer alleging copyright infringement for the use of the UNLV "fight song" in various EA sports games. The guy claims to own the copyright on both the lyrics and the music. It's unclear if EA was under the impression that UNLV had licensed the song, and we often don't think of university fight songs as being helped along by copyright (you generally want more people singing them). So, while I think EA should be able to use the song without any trouble, it's always amusing when strong defenders of copyright suddenly find themselves in legal battles in which they may discover that copyright creates some new problems they didn't expect.

Filed Under: copyright, fight song, infringement, unlv, video games
Companies: ea

Spain Recognizes That Deep Linking To Infringing Content Is Not Infringing

from the a-good-ruling dept

While other countries are still going back and forth on whether or not just linking to infringing content should be seen as infringing as well, an appeals court in Spain has upheld a lower court ruling that merely linking to infringing content is not infringing itself. This makes a lot of sense, as putting up links to content controlled by others should never be seen as a crime, especially when the linking party might not have any idea whether or not the linked content is infringing, and when that content could potentially change. Either way, this is a good ruling for various torrent tracker sites, since all they are doing is linking to content, rather than hosting any themselves.

Filed Under: copyright, deep linking, infringement, liability, spain

Making Google Products Easier To Use Is Not 'Encouraging Stealing'

from the it's-called-efficiency dept

Recently, Google Docs unveiled a number of new features including a built-in way to use Google Image Search to find pictures to complement written documents. Many people already use Google Image Search to find suitable graphics, regardless of the owner or copyright status, but this streamlining has some people calling foul. Under a provocative title suggesting that Google is "encouraging schoolchildren to steal photos," Steve Rubel continues to propagate the confusion between theft and infringement. No matter how many times we explain it, people just don't seem to understand that copyright infringement is not theft. Theft involves the removal of a rival good whereas copyright infringement makes a copy, leaving others' use uninhibited. Although the suggestion of expanding Google's Creative Commons filter is a welcome one, I doubt users who want to only use properly licensed content will fail to do so because of Google Doc's new feature. And those who want to use copyrighted images will do so whether or not they have to simply right click or open a new tab and search. All Google is doing here is making its perfectly legal features work better together. That's about efficiency, not "stealing."

Filed Under: graphics, infringement, searches, stealing

Why Do The Police Call In The RIAA To Investigate Potential Crimes?

from the that-doesn't-seem-right dept

We've long known that the boundary between US law enforcement and the enforcement wings of certain lobbyist organizations like the RIAA is way too blurry, but TorrentFreak is raising some important questions about why the police will call in RIAA investigators on certain cases, such as one where a speeding stop in Illinois resulted in a cop calling in the RIAA after spindles of writeable DVDs and CDs was found in the car. While the RIAA and law enforcement have a history of working closely together (and many people go back and forth between the two), the RIAA is still a highly biased party here, and shouldn't be involved in investigations where it has a personal stake. While some politicians are trying to turn US law enforcement into the private police of the entertainment industry, that doesn't mean that police should just consider RIAA investigators their peers. So can anyone explain why RIAA investigators should be allowed to be involved in such cases and why no one's called US law enforcement on things like this before?

Filed Under: bias, crimes, infringement, law enforcement, private investigations
Companies: riaa

More Scammers Using Bogus Copyright Infringement Accusations To Get Their Way

from the it's-just-too-easy dept

Last Friday, we noted that scammers were picking up the success the entertainment industry was having with "pre-settlement" letters to accused file sharers, and using a similar tactic with phone calls, demanding money to avoid getting sued. We noted that it was only a matter of time until those scammers moved to email as well -- and, of course, it's already happened. TorrentFreak is reporting on how scammers are sending threatening letters pretending to be from MediaDefender, one of the firms who provides questionable evidence to the recording industry for its lawsuits. These emails include an attachment, which the email says is more data on what the recipient is accused of sharing on various sites -- but which is actually a virus. So it's not quite to the level of extorting money directly yet -- but that's likely only a matter of time, if it's not happening already.

Filed Under: copyright, infringement, pre-settlement letters, scammers, viruses

More Media Companies Realizing That They Can Profit From 'Pirated' Content On YouTube

from the about-freakin'-time dept

Pretty much every day or so, we end up getting into a debate somewhere in the comments here on Techdirt concerning the rather important distinctions between "theft" and "copyright infringement." While there are a bunch (the lack of a "loss" on the part of the owner being a big one), one important one is that you don't see anyone choosing on purpose to allow theft of their own products in order to boost their business -- yet, we see folks purposely choosing to allow copyright infringement to boost their own business models all the time.

In fact, the NY Times notes that a growing number of media companies have stopped sending takedown notices to YouTube, preferring to use the videos on YouTube as a part of their business model. Google has helped them out in this manner by allowing copyright holders to "claim" videos that they did not upload, and choose to share in the revenue created by ads, rather than requiring a takedown. Among those who have stopped doing takedowns entirely are CBS, Universal Music, Lionsgate and Electronic Arts. Universal Music is a bit surprising, given how it's been even more adamant than any of the other major record labels concerning how evil copyright infringement is. The NYT's is surprised by CBS's involvement, given that it's the sister company of Viacom, who is famously suing YouTube for $1 billion. Yet, CBS has always been much more open to YouTube, recognizing that if its shows were being uploaded, that was a sign of having a lot of fans, not something to be shut down.

The president of digital media at Lionsgate makes the point pretty clearly. saying that the company:

“[Doesn't] like the idea of keeping fans of our products from being able to engage with our content. For the most part, people who are uploading videos are fans of our movies. They're not trying to be evil pirates, and they're not trying to get revenue from it."

If only others would recognize this simple fact. Of course, a good starting point would be recognizing that copyright infringement isn't "theft."

Filed Under: copyright, infringement, promotion, videos
Companies: cbs, ea, google, lionsgate, universal music, youtube