Eric Holder is so corrupt he won't do anything about this. Unfortunately the courts are going to have to decide this. The only other choice is to boot Obama out of office in November and hope the next Attorney General will uphold the law.
This is an excellent article and makes a great point about copyright law and the 1st Amendment. The copyright clause was part of the original Constitution before the Bill of Rights was passed. Once the 1st Amendment was passed it essentially repealed the copyright clause in the context of freedom of Speech.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech"
For instance if I were to recite a copyrighted poem the 1st Amendment should protect me from any government action including being sued via the courts. If I perform a copyright song I should have the same protection. Anything in context of free speech should not be actionable by a copyright holder because of the 1st Amendment.
If I use copyrighted material outside of free speech such as using it for commercial purposes then that would be actionable and Congress can make laws barring that activity.
The public should have virtually unlimited rights to use any copyrighted material in connection with free speech. It would be interesting if someone made this argument to the courts. Framed correctly this would be a very compelling argument.
An excellent article about Freedom of Speech and Copyrights and how The 1st Amendment when enacted made some parts of copyright law unconstitutional in the context of freedom of speech.
The copyright clause was part of the original Constitution. The Bill of Rights came after which included the 1st Amendment barring the free exercise of speech which means that amendment essentially repealed copyright law in the context of free speech.
If I quote a copyrighted poem the 1st Amendment should protect me from any kind of government action which includes being sued via the courts. If I perform a song or perform a play or post a photo or news article in connection with speech then that must be protected under the Constitution.
Now when it is not in context of speech such as using the content for commercial use then the free speech aspect would not apply.
It would be interesting if copyright law was challenged under the 1st Amendment.
News outlets that make it difficult to share stories or put themselves behind paywalls will continue to see both their relevance and bottom line deteriorate because they insist on trying to force readers to digest their information in a way that is foreign to the very workings of the Internet.
Makes you wonder how this will effect "Newsright" since their business model is to require blogs and others to pay for excepts? This ruling may take the legs right out from under them since Newsright is demanding payment for something that has now been ruled fair use.
The court may rule that since Stephens Media was also a party to it that they also are stripped from any claim to the copyrights and the new owners will be given full control leaving Stephens media with nothing unless they successfully bid them back at auction.
My guess is that the copyrights will also be stripped from Stephens media and the new owners will have full ownership of them. The only way for Stephens media to regain ownership of them would be to successfully bid for them.
Re: Software Patents is Pounding Square Peg into Round Hole
Patenting software is also a kin to patenting a recipe or a blue print or a set of instuctions(which is what software is). The very concept is ridiculous.
Software Patents is Pounding Square Peg into Round Hole
Since the courts and not Congress opened the flood-gates to software patents there was no way to tailor patent law to fit software and how it is developed so now we are constantly having to pound a square peg into a round hole. Congress could remedy this and change patent law to make it more compatible but there are still inherent problems with applying the very concept of a patent to software.
With software you are merely writing a set of instructions to command the computer to do something it can already inherently do. Very view programs use completely new and unique algorithms but ones that are already built into and part of the programming language and widely used throughout the Industry. Writing a program is more a kin to writing a story and the thought of program patents makes about as much sense as patenting a plot of a story since according to Edgar Alan Poe every story can fit into six basic plots and no one to date has been able to disprove this. you can see how restrictive and unworkable it would become if plots could be patented. Same goes for software.
Warner Brothers is making the case that they are not liable for bogus take-down request because it was a human that made the error not a human.
I could create an automated system that scours the Internet looking for Warner Brothers movies and when it detects one it will automatically download it. Using Warner Brothers logic I would not be responsible for the infringing because it was a computer that did the downloading not a human.
I went to college and there were times I didn't have health insurance at all so for Sandra Fluke to complain she didn't get contraception but had insurance is infuriating.
Obama is the greatest threat to freedom of speech.
Rush Limbaugh said on the air that he would not accept advertisers by escort services etc and would ask any affiliate stations to not run such ads during his show. The entire story is nothing but a smear on Rush Limbaugh.
This entire thing is nothing more than Obama's attempt to silence anyone he considers his enemy. Obama is an enemy of freedom of speech. He is trying to silence the Internet because it is free and is using this incident to try and further erode our freedom of speech.
Whenever a legal brief is submitted to a court they become public record and therefore should not be subject to copyright. I don't see how there is any case here?
This drives me crazy about so many software download sites. You think you are hitting a download button then it takes you to some page full of crap to download that you don't want and you have to search for the buried link to the actual download link. I don't mind other offerings but don't try and fool me by having me inadvertently download your "free" registry checker etc or other stuff that will just junk up my computer.
Where is the "transparency" the White House Promised?
The United States is no longer an exporter of democracy or human rights nor are we a significant exporter of goods and services. Our #1 export is now our draconian and ever expanding copyright and patent enforcement policies that run rough shod over the interests of other nations particularly developing nations as well as subordinating human and civil rights in the process.
This is a huge issue in Europe where the United States is rightfully being seen as an aggressor nation imposing its will on the rest of the world.
Among some of the gems in this document is the call for more transparency in framing our IP laws and International agreements.
Yes, like the transparency in negotiating ACTA in secret and signing without any input from the public, Congress, or effected Industries except for the Movie and Music industries.
Yes, like the transparency in the currently negotiated Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) which is also being held in secret without any input from effected parties except of course for the Movie and Music Industries.
Yes, like the transparency in trying to push through SOPA where Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Lamar Smith of Texas shut out Tech Companies and Internet Experts referring to them condescendingly as "nerds" but of course giving full credence and input from the Movie and Music Industries.
Promote Enforcement of U.S. Intellectual Property Rights through Trade Policy Tools ~
The U S Government has traditionally sought to use the tools of trade policy to seek strong intellectual property enforcement Examples include bilateral trade dialogues and problem-solving, communicating U S concerns clearly through reports such as the Special 301 Report, committing our trading partners
to protect American intellectual property through trade agreements such as the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and, when necessary, asserting our rights through the World Trade Organization (WTO) http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/intellectualproperty/intellectualpro perty_s
On the post: Why Hollywood's Six Strike Plan Should Be Investigated For Antitrust Violations
Corrupt AG will not act
On the post: The Pirate Bay Claims It's Going To Host The Site Via Drones Flying Over International Waters
Internet Free America
On the post: UK Parliament Asks For Public Comment On Six IP Policy Questions
Copyright Unconstitutional?
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech"
For instance if I were to recite a copyrighted poem the 1st Amendment should protect me from any government action including being sued via the courts. If I perform a copyright song I should have the same protection. Anything in context of free speech should not be actionable by a copyright holder because of the 1st Amendment.
If I use copyrighted material outside of free speech such as using it for commercial purposes then that would be actionable and Congress can make laws barring that activity.
The public should have virtually unlimited rights to use any copyrighted material in connection with free speech. It would be interesting if someone made this argument to the courts. Framed correctly this would be a very compelling argument.
http://c4sif.org/2011/11/copyright-is-unconstitutional/
On the post: UK Parliament Asks For Public Comment On Six IP Policy Questions
Copy
On the post: UK Parliament Asks For Public Comment On Six IP Policy Questions
Copyright Unconstitutional?
The copyright clause was part of the original Constitution. The Bill of Rights came after which included the 1st Amendment barring the free exercise of speech which means that amendment essentially repealed copyright law in the context of free speech.
If I quote a copyrighted poem the 1st Amendment should protect me from any kind of government action which includes being sued via the courts. If I perform a song or perform a play or post a photo or news article in connection with speech then that must be protected under the Constitution.
Now when it is not in context of speech such as using the content for commercial use then the free speech aspect would not apply.
It would be interesting if copyright law was challenged under the 1st Amendment.
http://c4sif.org/2011/11/copyright-is-unconstitutional/
On the post: Journalism Opportunities Aren't Drying Up, They Are Just Changing
On the post: New Ruling In Old Righthaven Case Makes Two Important Points: Protecting Fair Use And Secondary Liability
Ruling May Effect NewsRight
On the post: Whatever Copyrights Righthaven Might Actually Have Owned Now Transferred To Receiver For Auction
Re: Re:
On the post: Whatever Copyrights Righthaven Might Actually Have Owned Now Transferred To Receiver For Auction
On the post: Why Does An Unpatentable 'Abstract Idea' Become Patentable If You Add 'On The Internet'?
Re: Software Patents is Pounding Square Peg into Round Hole
On the post: Why Does An Unpatentable 'Abstract Idea' Become Patentable If You Add 'On The Internet'?
Software Patents is Pounding Square Peg into Round Hole
With software you are merely writing a set of instructions to command the computer to do something it can already inherently do. Very view programs use completely new and unique algorithms but ones that are already built into and part of the programming language and widely used throughout the Industry. Writing a program is more a kin to writing a story and the thought of program patents makes about as much sense as patenting a plot of a story since according to Edgar Alan Poe every story can fit into six basic plots and no one to date has been able to disprove this. you can see how restrictive and unworkable it would become if plots could be patented. Same goes for software.
On the post: Ltlw0lf's Favorite Techdirt Posts of the Week
Re: Warner Brothers Twisted Logic ~ CORRECTION
On the post: Ltlw0lf's Favorite Techdirt Posts of the Week
Warner Brothers Twisted Logic
I could create an automated system that scours the Internet looking for Warner Brothers movies and when it detects one it will automatically download it. Using Warner Brothers logic I would not be responsible for the infringing because it was a computer that did the downloading not a human.
On the post: DailyDirt: Epic Fail In Advertising
On the post: DailyDirt: Epic Fail In Advertising
Obama is the greatest threat to freedom of speech.
This entire thing is nothing more than Obama's attempt to silence anyone he considers his enemy. Obama is an enemy of freedom of speech. He is trying to silence the Internet because it is free and is using this incident to try and further erode our freedom of speech.
On the post: Westlaw And Lexis-Nexis Sued AGAIN Over Claims That They're Infringing On Copyrights Of Legal Filings Themselves
Are legal briefs not public records?
On the post: ICE Considered One Of The Worst Places To Work In The Federal Government
On the post: How To Turn A Legitimate Buyer Into A Pirate In Five Easy Steps
Frustrating
On the post: The Pirate Bay May Get Blocked In The UK; That'll Stop The Infringement
TPB Wont Skip a Beat
On the post: Shining Light On ACTA's Lack Of Transparency
Where is the "transparency" the White House Promised?
This is a huge issue in Europe where the United States is rightfully being seen as an aggressor nation imposing its will on the rest of the world.
The White House Strategic Plan on IP Enforcement.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/intellectualproperty/intell ectualproperty_strategic_plan.pdf
Among some of the gems in this document is the call for more transparency in framing our IP laws and International agreements.
Yes, like the transparency in negotiating ACTA in secret and signing without any input from the public, Congress, or effected Industries except for the Movie and Music industries.
Yes, like the transparency in the currently negotiated Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) which is also being held in secret without any input from effected parties except of course for the Movie and Music Industries.
Yes, like the transparency in trying to push through SOPA where Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Lamar Smith of Texas shut out Tech Companies and Internet Experts referring to them condescendingly as "nerds" but of course giving full credence and input from the Movie and Music Industries.
Promote Enforcement of U.S. Intellectual Property Rights through Trade Policy Tools ~
The U S Government has traditionally sought to use the tools of trade policy to seek strong intellectual property enforcement Examples include bilateral trade dialogues and problem-solving, communicating U S concerns clearly through reports such as the Special 301 Report, committing our trading partners
to protect American intellectual property through trade agreements such as the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and, when necessary, asserting our rights through the World Trade Organization (WTO)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/intellectualproperty/intellectualpro perty_s
Next >>