BBC - Wales Music: Newport State Of Mind: why has it been removed?
I have thought since this video first came to light that there was a certain legal ambiguity to the song and its lyrics. While straight cover versions are entirely legal (as long as properly credited) and a staple of the music business from the very top to the very bottom, interpretations of existing songs are a different matter altogether. 'Substantial rewrite' is a pseudo-legal term in the music industry meaning that when you're covering a song or using an element of a song - whether lyrically or musically - it requires the permission of the original copyright holder. | source : www.bbc.co.uk
Recommandé parPaul Bradshaw le 10/08/10 20:29 | permalien
panGloss: When does information not want to be free?
I was wrong. Asking more people (and many thanks here to the wonderful ORG-legal list, especially Technollama, Victoria McEvedy, Simon Bradshaw, Daithi MacSithigh and Andrew Katz)) revealed the main weapon for gagging publication of FOI requests: that useful, all purpose, font of legal restraint - copyright.
In my innocence, I would have expected that a document obtained under FOI could be automatically republished by the recipient. Not so. The Office of Public Sector Information (OPSI)'s website reminds us that :
Information listed in Publication Schemes, which can be disclosed under FOI, will be subject to copyright protection. The supply of documents under FOI does not give the person who receives the information an automatic right to re-use the documents without obtaining the consent of the copyright holder. Permission to re-use copyright information is generally granted in the form of a licence.[italics added] | source : blogscript.blogspot.com
Recommandé parPaul Bradshaw le 27/07/10 16:36 | permalien
On s’en fout de savoir qui chante “Ca plane pour moi” ! #copyrightsucks » Article » Blogging The News, "Un bon journal, c'est une nation qui se parle à elle-même" [Arthur Miller]
: On s'en fout de savoir qui chante "Ca plane pour moi" ! #copyrightsucks http://bit.ly/apuOG7 | source : bloggingthenews.info
Recommandé parDamien Van Achter le 27/07/10 14:06 | permalien
Woot To AP: You Owe Us $17.50 For Copying Our Content - The Consumerist
So, The AP, here we are. Just to be fair about this, we’ve used your very own pricing scheme to calculate how much you owe us. By looking through the link above, and comparing your post with our original letter, we’ve figured you owe us roughly $17.50 for the content you borrowed from our blog post, which, by the way, we worked very very hard to create. But, hey. We’re all friends here. And invoicing is such a hassle in today’s paperless society, are we right? How about this: instead of cutting us a check for the web content you liberated from our site, all you’ll need to do is show us your email receipt from today’s two pack of Sennheiser MX400 In-Ear Headphones, and we’ll call it even. | source : consumerist.com
Recommandé parPaul Bradshaw le 07/07/10 13:45 | permalien
The British Are Coming! (To Serve Google a DMCA Notice)
Google has been quick to remove copyrighted material from services like YouTube where it hosts the content, but it has not been so quick to remove infringing sites entirely from its search index. Google has, however, removed the 38 requested links at the behest of BPI | source : m.readwriteweb.com
Recommandé parPaul Bradshaw le 24/06/10 08:54 | permalien
BBC - Open Secrets: Victory for whatdotheyknow website
the Commons later offered [2.52MB PDF] to supply information through whatdotheyknow if the website publishers agreed to sign a licence for reproduction of Parliamentary documents.
This included the requirement "not to reproduce material for the purposes of disparaging either House or bringing it into disrepute".
Last November Mr Irving, who works on whatdotheyknow, complained to the Information Commissioner about the House of Commons' refusal to comply with his FOI application in the manner he requested.
On Monday the ICO instructed the House to send the information through whatdotheyknow within 35 days, unless it decides to appeal.
The House of Commons is not the only public authority which is uneasy about whatdotheyknow. Brent Council also refuses to respond to requests through the website on the grounds that it would breach copyright. It is the subject of similar complaints to the ICO. | source : www.bbc.co.uk
Recommandé parPaul Bradshaw le 10/06/10 12:48 | permalien
Gawker — Gossip from Manhattan and the Beltway to Hollywood and the Valley
[The LVRJ's law firm] has filed roughly 40 lawsuits in recent weeks against all manner of publishers, including the cat blog (allegrawong.com) and sites that follow motorcycle racing, emergency medicine, advertising and sports betting. Get em! Once you put that cat blog outta business, readers will come flocking back to the LVRJ, Sin City's second-best broadsheet! The war to inform the public must be won in the courthourse! Drive the bloggers into penury! Raze the internet! The future of newspapers is tomorrow! [Pic via] | source : m.gawker.com
Recommandé parPaul Bradshaw le 09/06/10 22:29 | permalien
Apple Pulls Pulse News Reader for iPad From App Store After New York Times complaint
Yesterday morning, the pair of Stanford University graduate students who made the hot news-reading iPad app, Pulse News Reader, were ecstatic to be mentioned first–for being among the most promising developers for the new tablet device–by Apple CEO Steve Jobs in his keynote speech at the Worldwide Developers Conference in San Francisco.
But by the afternoon, that flush of entrepreneurial success had turned sour, after Apple (AAPL) informed the two that Pulse was being pulled from the App Store after it received a written notice from the New York Times Company (NYT) declaring that “The New York Times Company believes your application named ‘Pulse News Reader’ infringes The New York Times Company’s rights.” | source : kara.allthingsd.com
Recommandé parPhilippe Martin le 09/06/10 18:00 | permalien
Bulgarian Chess Tournament Organizers Sue Website For Reporting Chess Moves, Claim Copyright Infringement | Techdirt
Europe has "database rights" -- a concept the US has (mostly) rejected -- which do grant the ability to apply copyrights on collections of facts, under the slightly warped theory that this kind of incentive is needed to aggregate those facts into a database. Of course, research has been done on this for years, and they prove, without a doubt, that database rights appear to hold back database businesses! Comparing identical industries in the US (without database rights) and Europe (with database rights) shows that the US industries are significantly larger. | source : techdirt.com
Recommandé parPaul Bradshaw le 07/06/10 18:25 | permalien