Showing posts with label DMCA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label DMCA. Show all posts

Saturday, July 04, 2020

Cojones On The Cutting Edge

On Independence Day, I write about Courage, Class Action, a culture of piracy... and sauce for the gander.

Courage first. The copyrightalliance.org has generated a two-part report on Thom Tillis's and Chris Coons's Senate subcommittee hearings asking, "Is the DMCA's Notice & Takedown System Working in the 21st Century?"

Kudos to panelists Kerry Muzzey (composer); Don Henley (musician); Jeff Sedlik (photographer) and Doug Preston (author/Authors Guild).

Part 1
https://copyrightalliance.org/ca_post/senators-and-creators-say-notice-and-takedown-system-is-broken-while-platforms-blame-creators/

Part 2
https://copyrightalliance.org/ca_post/senators-and-creators-say-notice-and-takedown-system-is-broken-while-platforms-blame-creators/?_zs=TqSBb&_zl=bj5A2

As Kerry Muzzey explains, standing up for ones intellectual property rights is like being "a tiny David in a sea of big tech Goliaths."

Meanwhile the courageous Maria Scheider (Grammy award winning composer and performer) and Pirate Monitor LTD have launched a likely-Quixotic class action, taking the sartorial scissors (wordplay on the meaning of her name) to the big tech goolies of the self-same Goliaths.
https://musictechpolicy.com/2020/07/03/2016-guest-post-by-schneidermaria-content-id-is-still-just-piracy-in-disguise-an-open-letter-to-rightsholders-and-a-music-industry-ready-to-renegotiate-with-a-monster/

One might also laugh out loud at the outrageous cheek of Judicial Watch, a charity with the popular motto, "Because No One Is Above The Law," which is claiming viewpoint discrimination if they are prevented from painting their own urgent and timely expressive message in enormous yellow lettering on DC and New York City tarmacadam.

https://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Paint-NY-Letter-June-2020.pdf

They do say, what is sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander!

Apparently, there is no law against it, and no process to apply for a permit, so perhaps we can all chalk big bold advertisements for our novels on hot public pavements.

All the best,
Rowena Cherry 

PS. Be on the lookout for genuine-looking emails from gmail and spotify that appear to suggest that someone else is trying to log in to "your" account. 4th July might be a good date to change passwords again. Just saying...

Saturday, March 28, 2020

False Flags

This week, the Authors Guild exposed a gob-smacking abuse of the public trust and of the concept of law order and copyright. Kudos to Authors Guild for that!

https://www.authorsguild.org/industry-advocacy/internet-archives-uncontrolled-digital-lending/

There are many Covid-19 scammers pretending to be helpful, while actually ripping off the public or writers, artists, musicians and film makers, or pursuing a political agenda, and  IA appears to be one of them. Authors and bookstores cannot survive if society tolerates digital looting.

Andy Chatterly, co-founder of the for-profit anti-piracy business MUSO (which will send out take down notices on behalf of its paying subscribers) has published a white paper on the rise and rise of digital piracy... which is discouraging reading for creative individuals and small businesses.

https://www.muso.com/covid-19-protect-landing-page?utm_campaign=COVID-19%20Protect%20&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=85294752&_hsenc=p2ANqtz---AbBRnta68KyCYlaKrM5_YKblGvUx6eYDT2G47U_bcAf9KhL_7hYzXL6oPcDBa_qaMEY2cOK1jNogFEsi-FuSI2PWwg&_hsmi=85294752

Recently testifying to the United States Senate subcommittee on Intellectual Property under an apparent false flag were members of The Pirate Party, as discussed by the Chris Castle, guest of the editors of thetrichordist.

It's kind of like bank robbers testifying on how bank vaults could be made more transparent and accessible to the public.

Particularly dispiriting are Chris Castle's revelations (or not) about the part played by academics and lawyers (and sometimes by members of the legislature under the influence of lobbyists) in weakening copyright and exploiting and enlarging loopholes in already Gruyere-like IP laws.

Thanks to MusicTechPolicy for a lively report on what Jonathan Yunger had to say to Chairman Thom Tillis's and Ranking Member Christopher Coons's committee about the functioning and effectiveness (or not) of the DMCA.

https://musictechpolicy.com/2020/03/12/you-cant-call-911-jyunger-of-millenniumfilms-tells-senate-why-piracy-is-still-a-problem-and-how-u-s-has-failed-to-lead/

That's four lengthy links. Enjoy!

All the best,

Rowena Cherry 
SPACE SNARK™ http://www.spacesnark.com

Saturday, February 22, 2020

Who's Got Your Authorial Back?

While not every authors' organization is as helpful as helpful can be, here are a few:

SFWA has a sample DMCA generator online.
https://www.sfwa.org/2010/07/sample-dmca-generator-for-authors/

SFWA has also been taking on trolls on Goodreads... with some success.
For authors who have given up on Goodreads because there seemed to be no recourse against anonymous persons who launched personal attacks on authors, or wrote "reviews" that appeared to be intended to harm the author, rather than genuine reviews of the book, things may have changed.

Help in the case of plainly egregious behavior may be forthcoming from support@goodreads.com.

SFWA members can receive help from SFWA in cases of doxxing, fake reviews of books that are not yet available, obvious targeting of entire series etc.

The Authors Guild has posted sample DMCA notices along with some useful information about Open Library (which some would say is more like a pirate site than a true library.)
https://www.authorsguild.org/industry-advocacy/update-open-library/

It's worth sending a TakeDown notice.

Savvy Authors is a great resource for advice and workshops.
https://savvyauthors.com/

Finally (for now), the copyrightalliance has a very helpful blog, most recently explaining :The 5 W's of Copyright Registration".
https://copyrightalliance.org/ca_post/5-ws-copyright-registration/?_zs=TqSBb&_zl=E7Cx1

All the best,

Rowena Cherry 

Saturday, October 27, 2018

The Law And Unintended Consequences

This weekend is the twentieth anniversary  (china!) of the signing of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA).  As for me, I mentally awarded the DMCA its rightful wooden spoon five years ago, on its fifteenth anniversary.

Would you say that "china" is appropriate?  The DMCA is certainly broken.  Of course, it was intended to encourage cooperation between copyright owners and internet service providers to protect copyright and to reduce piracy.  Unfortunately, when the DMCA was written, most people used dial up to access the internet, downloading a file took all afternoon, and using the internet meant that the phone line was tied up for the duration of one person's internet "surfing" time.

Nowadays, it takes less time to make a good cup of tea than it does to scan a book and "share" it with potentially thousands of people.  A generation has grown up expecting that anything they can find online is theirs for the taking, free, covered by their cost in purchasing a computer and internet service (a false perception), and the big tech companies have taught everyone to believe that copyrighted works of all kinds are "content".

There's power in words.

In honor of the DMCA, the Copyright Alliance's Copyright Counsel, Terrica Carrington has penned an important, two-part retrospective article about the lofty aims and mixed success of the DMCA.

https://copyrightalliance.org/ca_post/dmca-notice-and-takedown/


All the best,

Rowena Cherry

Sunday, December 10, 2017

In Praise Of Procrastinators....

Well, perhaps not "in praise", but I like alliteration in my titles. It would be more accurate to title this article, "Sympathy For Procrastinators."

If you are a common or garden blogger, you are probably not an OSP (Online Service Provider), and you probably do not need to register your Copyright Agent with the copyright office.

Or perhaps you do. If you have a YouTube video of your own promotional book trailer in your footer, are you sure that YouTube isn't showing--and won't ever show--something similarly titled, without telling you?

For $6.00 and the loss of some privacy, you can register yourself as the copyright agent for up to ten (10) websites and blogs, and you will be covered by the Safe Harbor provisions of the DMCA in case some visitor posts someone else's copyrighted content (a photo, or hyperlink, or lyrics) without permission.

Or maybe you have a website and a webmistress, and you never asked her where she licensed the images that decorate your site.... or whether she licensed the fonts.

You start here:
https://dmca.copyright.gov/osp/p1.html

You create an account with a user name and a password, then wait for an email from donotreply@loc.gov to confirm your DMCA Designated Agent Registration Account.

When it comes, you follow the link, sign in, and follow a 4-step process filling in your real name, real address, real phone number, also your business name. All authors ought to have an LLC.  Then, you add the names of your websites and blogs. Then you check for accuracy, and you pay.

Done!

For those more motivated by what lawyers say in their blogs, there's "Two Copyright To-Dos Before Year End", from  Elizabeth A. Tassi of Stinson Leonard Street LLP

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=8df3bdf5-c502-4635-8051-1b1c7c8f9e69&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2017-12-07&utm_term=

It's a well-written article.  This author recommends it.

"December 31,  2017 Deadline to Avoid Loss of Safe Harbor Protection Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act" is a short, to the point reminder from David A. Donohue, blogging for  Frosse Zelnick Lehrman & Zissu PC (arguably the largest lawfirm in the world dealing with trademark and copyright law).

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=559495f9-094c-4fb7-85d7-82415fe10c09&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2017-12-07&utm_term=

Another worth-your-time legal blog is "The Low-Down On DMCA Regulations And Take-Downs".
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=35766cb1-218a-4e96-9c41-eedf04861ae8&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2017-12-07&utm_term=

For Burr & Forman LLP, legal bloggers Brooke Penrose and Deborah Peckham include a warning about the consequences of failing to designate an agent.

Finally, for our European readers (who know all about the cookies that Blogger puts on their equipment), there's a heartening article about Pirate Bay and Torrents from legal blogger Jaroslav Tajbr of Noerr LLP.  (My Mnemonic : No Error).

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=1e8b3a75-d031-4185-880d-d1adb14b5ae3&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2017-12-08&utm_term=

That's "Torrents At The European Court Of Justice Of The European Union." And, it's about time someone ruled that torrents are infringement, IMHO!

All the best,
Rowena Cherry

Sunday, August 13, 2017

Are Your Works Being Infringed?

Someone asked me how to find out if their works are being infringed.

One method is to do an online search for the title of their book(s) and of their authorname. Another is to set up a variety of Google Alerts for their book title, also for some distinctive phrases used in their writing.

Osborne Clarke suggests some practical ways to respond to infringement.



Not every infringement can be taken down. Sometimes, Google lawyers will declare (mistakenly) that an infringing use is "Fair". Google lawyers have done that to me over "Knight's Fork", and I have no recourse.

I can say with reasonable certainty that, if a so-called online library is lending a "Rowena Cherry" book--for instance "Knight's Fork by Rowena Cherry" to subscribers in any digital format, that online library has no right to do so, because I never gave permission --and explicitly refused permission-- for any of my books, except "Mating Net" by Rowena Beaumont Cherry (which is published by New Concepts Publishing), and the hunk cover version of "Forced Mate" by Rowena Beaumont Cherry which was published by NBI, to be released in ebook formats.

Did you notice that? A lawful digital copy of my work is by "Rowena Beaumont Cherry". Any ebook by "Rowena Cherry" was illegally created and illegally sold.

However, if the (alleged) pirate site uses a privacy service, and the privacy service is the only link provided on the (alleged) pirate for any kind of contact at all, an author is within her rights to contact that privacy service to complain vociferously and repeatedly.

But... do not create an account.  In my opinion, Congress and the Administration and the Copyright Office make a serious error when they agree that it is lawful for a site such as EBay to force authors to join its VERO (verified rights owner) program in order to complain about copyright infringement.

Why should a creator who is being ripped off be denied the right to send a DMCA notice, as prescribed by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and forced instead to subscribe to a site or become a member of a site?

It's like being forced to purchase a product one does not want or need. Only it is worse.

The trouble with joining any site or service, (apart from the possibility of having to pay them) is the Terms of Service. One cannot join (even for the purposes of asking them to cease and desist from piracy or facilitating piracy or profiting from piracy) without agreeing to their TOS.

Have you ever read TOS? Try it sometime. Any site's TOS will do.  Do judges and lawyers and lawmakers read TOS? Usually, part of what you agree to is that you give up the right to sue them.

How's that? A site like EBay or Google may protect alleged copyright infringers, and give the alleged copyright infringers the ability to profit from alleged piracy, but in order to send a takedown notice, the ripped off author is forced to promise to indemnify the host and patron of the alleged copyright infringers.  That does not seem right to me.

On the other hand, there are many online "subscription libraries" that one suspects do not have the books they claim to have. They may only want your credit card information.

Stay wary, my friends!

All the best,
Rowena Cherry



Sunday, February 05, 2017

A Good Take-Down (DMCA related)

This week, I had a most excellent experience of the Take-Down kind with Scribd.

A Google Alert  informed me (a daily occurrence) that one of my works had been uploaded to the internet for free distribution by a French-speaking user rejoicing in the improbable name of "treaczoyrossu(date redacted)".

The "(date redacted)" is minor editorializing on my part. To my knowledge, my works have never been lawfully translated into French or any other foreign language.

I followed the link to Scribd, and after establishing a good faith belief that my copyright was indeed being infringed, I discovered this page on the platform.

https://www.scribd.com/copyright/report-infringement

Below the blurb is a very easy, mostly pre-populated form for copyright owners to use. It was quick, simple, and effective. Within a few hours, the page was down. If your work is being shared without your permission on Scribd, use the site. Don't bother paying any of the pirate hunters.

The Copyright Alliance would like you to share your experiences with Take-Downs and Bad Actors.

Please complete the Copyright Alliance survey no later than February 17, 2017.

It's a "Survey Monkey" survey; they known when you have done it (even if you switch on your PVA and try to do it again from a different part of the world... I know that, not because I was trying to cheat/troll but because I wanted a good link to post for you all, rather than a "you've-done-this-survey" link.)

And now for the "Good Catches" of the week, aka other interesting blogs and articles you might enjoy, if you are not watching sports today:

Artist as underdog
https://hughstephensblog.net/2017/01/23/the-artist-as-underdog/

The Accountability of Web Platforms
http://illusionofmore.com/the-accountability-of-web-platforms/

More on Accountability
http://copyrightalliance.org/ca_post/bmg-cox-accountability/

On the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch and his significance for authors, the Authors Guild opined guardedly in a recent newsletter. Judge Gorsuch "is more likely to interpret the copyright law, including DMCA provisions dealing with online piracy, in accordance with their plain meaning (whereas many courts in recent years have stretched the provisions far beyond their plain meaning in order to protect technology platforms)..."

The newletter was mailed to Authors Guild members. I cannot find it online, but there were invitations to forward the entire newsletter to others, or to "share" it on Facebook.

https://www.facebook.com/AuthorsGuild/

Some stock advice from very savvy musicians:
Facebook:
https://thetrichordist.com/2017/02/02/without-music-licenses-facebook-cant-pursue-long-form-video-should-investors-say-fckthezuck/

Spotify: (Two intriguing stories, one mentioning a $200,000,000 class action lawsuit)
https://thetrichordist.com/2017/01/26/was-daniel-ek-really-joking-when-he-offered-obama-job-at-spotify-was-obama-joking-when-he-asked-for-one/

and
https://thetrichordist.com/2017/02/03/will-spotify-convertible-debt-cannibalize-major-label-and-insider-equity/

And, my take on the following article is that it looks like the Copyright Office, funded by the American taxpayer, is being used to facilitate copyright infringement on a massive scale.

https://musictech.solutions/2017/01/26/mass-noi-update-christopher-sabec-and-rightscorp-tackle-the-copyright-office-problem/

Final reminder:

Take the DMCA Survey Here

All the best,

Rowena Cherry

Sunday, December 04, 2016

There Are Limits (to Safe Harbor), Pallante Protest, And More....

The legal blog of  Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP  (not a blog I've seen before) provides a detailed and fascinating --at least for copyright wonks-- article about "red flag" knowledge, and when an ISP or OSP may be said to have knowledge of copyright infringement, even when a takedown notice has not been submitted.

http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=ddf71645-cedf-442b-a4a8-6345fb365fd2&utm_source=lexology+daily+newsfeed&utm_medium=html+email+-+body+-+general+section&utm_campaign=lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=lexology+daily+newsfeed+2016-12-02&utm_term=

Also former Registers of Copyrights Ralph Oman and MaryBeth Peters have written a joint letter to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees concerning the recent treatment of former Register of Copyrights Maria Pallante.

https://artistrightswatch.com/2016/11/30/must-read-two-former-u-s-copyright-heads-defend-maria-pallante-from-sacking-by-rogue-librarian-of-congress/

It has been alleged that Maria Pallante was removed from her prestigous work, and assigned to policy planning for the Copyright Office gift shop. Some have allegedly speculated that the reason for Register Pallante's forced career move was that a certain search giant company's lobbyists and former search giant company's employees who now work for the current administration object to Register Pallante's alleged opposition to new regulations that benefit primarily Google, and that are disruptive and costly to copyright owners.

More articles on this scandal can be found on the copyrightalliance.org website.

Also on copyrightalliance.org are a series of short videos by copyright owners about what copyright and copyright protection means to them.

http://copyrightalliance.org/education/videos/copyright-support-career/

Submissions are welcome and being sought by the copyright alliance.

For European visitors to this blog, please be aware that Google puts cookies on your computers and other devices for the purpose of identifying your susceptibility to specific advertising. The authors of this blog have no control over this, but we have a duty to remind you of the cookies from time to time.

Other reminders: as of December 1st 2016, website owners who accept user generated content from others must register their copyright agent with the Copyright Office electronically.

http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=7ab96530-bb57-4072-b753-bd226dbb0f87&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2016-12-02&utm_term=

December 9th is the USPTO open meeting  on the digital marketplace. The Authors Guild will be attending.

All the best,
Rowena Cherry

Sunday, November 13, 2016

Website Owners And Blog Owners -- Protect Yourself

I've only seen this on legal blogs...  Effective December 1st 2016, if you want Safe Harbor protection for your website or blog or app, you need to register your copyright agent information with the Copyright Office.

Otherwise, you don't get Safe Harbor protection if someone posts a hyperlink on your site or blog that links to infringing material.

Read more on this legal blog
http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=2d78785b-8083-46b6-89f3-2c725911aeea

Many thanks to Coe W. Ramsey of the lawfirm Brooks Pierce McLendon Humphrey & Leonard LLP
for his article on Lexology.

According to Mr. Ramsey, the copyright office has reduced the fee for registering an copyright agent to $6.00 but when this author looked at the LOC.GOV site it is still showing the old price (which is much more expensive).
http://www.copyright.gov/onlinesp/

Mark Whittow and Trevor M, Gates  of K&L Gates LLP share their perspective on the new rule, and
have more links and tables.
https://www.iplawwatch.com/2016/11/new-dmca-safe-harbor-copyright-agent-requirements-for-online-service-providers/

David J Wittenstein of Cooley LLP offers his own clear guidance on the new rules :
http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=d599720a-3b71-438e-94a7-48da57fb5586

Some of us blogging authors may not feel that we are "service providers", but there are blogs that appear to infringe on authors' copyrights and/or link to online file storage sites where infringing copies of ebooks are illegally made available for downloading. We've all seen them. This new rule appears to make it very clear that hyperlinking is infringement.

By the way, dear visitors, you may not hyperlink to other authors' ebooks, but you might need safe harbor protection if visitors or guests (or you yourself) snag and use photographs lifted from social media sites that someone else posted without the copyright owners' permissions.

http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=2284dee5-438d-43d5-b81e-1b207050ecc8&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2016-10-24&utm_term=


If you are an author and wish to check that your copyrights are registered, go here:
http://www.copyright.gov/onlinesp/

You can enter either your books by title, or enter your own name for instance (Cherry Rowena) or even search by keyword.

All the best,


Copyright agent for this alien romances blog:

Rowena Cherry
rowena@rowenacherry.com

PO Box 7301
2211 South Telegraph
Bloomfield Hills
MI 48302

Thursday, November 10, 2016

Cory Doctorow on Despotic Dominion

Cory Doctorow's latest LOCUS column delves into some oddities of copyright, intellectual property, and the DMCA (which he calls "a giant, gnarly hairball of a law"), beginning with a quotation from William Blackstone (the great 18th-century legal authority) on private property as "sole and despotic dominion" over the entity of which ownership is claimed:

Sole and Despotic Dominion

The essay first discusses the history of "intellectual property," a relatively recent term. He cites the notice that used to appear in paperbacks, warning the reader that the book couldn't be copied, lent, resold, etc., under penalty of law—in short, strictly speaking the buyer couldn't even give away the book. Doctorow calls BS on this warning. However, he applies the same judgment to the similar warning in current books, "No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical..." without the publisher's permission—which seems more problematic.

He remarks, "If copyright law were a system of magic in a fantasy novel, we'd never buy it." In his opinion, it's riddled with "exceptions and carve-outs that ignore its alleged underlying rationale and just fiddle things around for the sake of narrative convenience." Most of the article deals with the application of the DMCA to software, with wide-ranging effects many consumers never think about. The mind boggles to contemplate the number and variety of common devices that contain electronic software—and therefore fall under protection of the DMCA. Nowadays our homes are full of gadgets that have copyrighted software inside them. As with all those computer programs whose conditions of use most customers never read, under this system we don't really own many of the objects we buy, in the sense that what we can do with them is legally limited. Doctorow labels this system "feudalism."

Doctorow's essays on copyright always leave me ambivalent. As an author, of course I want strong copyright protection. As a reader, researcher, and occasional anthologist (decades ago), however, I don't want copyright to last forever. The main effect of an absurdly extended copyright period on older obscure authors is to guarantee that they remain obscure; an editor who might want to reprint a story by such an author, resurrecting the work from the grave as it were, could find it prohibitively hard to discover who holds the rights. And as a fan I get irked with Disney (for example) for locking away films they keep unavailable to potential viewers and researchers but don't make any profit from themselves, e.g. the very early cartoon shorts (which would be out of copyright by now if they were books) or SONG OF THE SOUTH (permanently taken off the market because its depiction of race relations has been Overtaken by Events). Regarding music: I've heard that authors can get in trouble if they reproduce so much as half a line from a copyright-protected song in a work of fiction without paying for permission to quote. Where's the logic in that restriction? Either the song is well known or not. If so, a brief snippet from it does the creator no harm, and you're quoting something your audience is probably familiar with anyway. If not, the quotation does the creator a favor, in effect, by drawing attention to an otherwise neglected musical work.

Even in a capitalist society, no ownership right is absolute. (You can't burn down your own house with impunity or build an addition onto it without a permit.) But where should lines be drawn?

Margaret L. Carter

Carter's Crypt

Sunday, May 01, 2016

EMF 24/7

Can one prove something that one does not want to prove?  Of course, but there will be a bias, and the bias may skew the results. Moreover, those reading the studies may read them with bias.

No one wants to prove that cellphones cause diabetes, brain cancer, dementia, pathological anxiety,
lowered IQ, childhood cancer, erectile dysfunction, reproductive problems, ringing in the ears, insomnia, migraines.....etc etc. But, what if they do?

In 2011 a working group appointed by the World Health Organization classified cellphone use as "possibly carcinogenic to humans".

http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/radiation/cell-phones-fact-sheet

Four prestigious American organizations concluded that there was not enough evidence/strong enough evidence/conclusive evidence/definitive evidence/replicable evidence. So, they will study the possibility for the next 20-to-30 years.

Meanwhile, a Chinese group of scientists did duplicate the Swedish studies.... and no one is talking about it.  https://betweenrockandhardplace.wordpress.com/2015/05/18/cell-phones-and-blood-brain-barrier-chinese-scientists-confirm-findings-of-swedish-salford-group/

During World War II, governments gave cigarettes to soldiers. Presumably, smoking the cigarettes wasn't compulsory, but even for non-smokers, there was no way to avoid second-hand smoke so they might as well have been compulsory.  Now, we have cellphones, and even dinosaurs who refuse to use cellphones cannot avoid the EMF of other people's cellphones.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/12/20/radiation-from-cell-phones-and-wifi-are-making-people-sick--are-you-at-risk.aspx

What will humanity look like in thirty years' time after we have been "whole-body irradiated by man-made electromagnetic fields for the entirity of our lives"? Already some individuals are more sensitive than others. And perhaps children are most at risk.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/children/11486167/Are-smartphones-making-our-children-mentally-ill.html

Science fiction is full of dystopian worlds... and mostly-heroic mutants. Maybe EMF 24/7 is as good a way to explain the backstory as anything else.


And now for something completely... outrageous.

Seen on a blog that is well worth following
http://musictechpolicy.com/2016/04/29/youtube-creates-financial-incentive-for-counternotices-that-profit-youtube/

In a nutshell, it is probably a conflict of interest for a hosting site that makes money from copyright infringement to encourage alleged copyright infringers to file DMCA counternotices. When a counternotice is filed, the copyright infringing content goes back up, and stays back up, unless or until the copyright owner finds the financial wherewithal to commence a federal lawsuit.  Most copyright owners simply cannot afford to do that. The result is that their pirated works remain permanently available for the financial benefit of the site and the pirate, and the copyright owner gets nothing.

Here's a link from the recent World IP Day with an interview with Authors Guild President, Mary Rasenberger. http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2016/04/26/balanced-ip-system-content-creators/id=68646/

Happy reading. And writing!

All the best,
Rowena Cherry

Saturday, February 06, 2016

How Is the DMCA Working For You?

If you are a creator (author, musician, songwriter, photographer, artist) and have had your copyrights infringed by others, your thoughts, experiences and stories about piracy and the DMCA Takedown process could help the copyrightalliance.org prepare their testimony for the US Copyright Office.

Please complete this survey
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/512study

Thank you,

Rowena Cherry

Sunday, September 20, 2015

Intellectual Property Rights, Hypocrisy, Transparency, Immorality (By Others)

I mean to write about government "consent degrees", which seems to me to be an Orwellian term for the situation where authors (whether of music or of literature) are forced to accept reduced royalties and loss of negotiating rights by the heavy hand of the government which favors Big Business political contributors, and enables these "disruptors" or exploit writers.

However, my thoughts aren't fully formed, so for now, I will post some thought-provoking links to other writers' blogs and articles in honor of Talk Like A Pirate Day, which was yesterday.

Arggggh.

(Credit and kudos for this collection goes to The Trichordist although I am re-mixing their links and adding comments of my own here and there.)

For instance, I am surprised to find myself agreeing with Robert Reich (an advocate for the redistribution of property)... or at least with his headlines. IMHO, the "sharing economy" takes from the copyright owners the right and ability to be paid --or paid fairly-- for their work.

Robert Reich: The sharing economy will be our undoing | Salon
http://www.salon.com/2015/08/25/robert_reich_the_sharing_economy_will_be_our_undoing_partner/
And
Robert Reich: Is Big Tech Too Powerful....
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/09/20/opinion/is-big-tech-too-powerful-ask-google.html?_r=0


Amazon, Facebook and Google have the same secret  | Salon
http://www.salon.com/2015/08/30/amazon_facebook_and_google_have_the_same_secret/
* Our modern tech monopolies made billions and transformed the economy in different ways, but this was the base.
This Salon article points out that Microsoft has enjoyed a monopoly because its business model is based on intellectual property.
"Apple, Oracle, Google, Facebook, Amazon) have been accused of antitrust violations. But even when the antitrust cases have gone against them, the basis of these monopolies in intellectual property has limited the effectiveness of remedies." 

Randolph May and Seth Cooper explain why the Founding Fathers valued copyright protection for creators.
Why intellectual property rights matter | The Washington Times
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/3/randolph-may-seth-cooper-why-intellectual-property/
* The Founders believed ownership of one’s labor is a natural right
"...a substantial amount of online piracy is attributable to the contemporary “downgrading” of IP rights by otherwise law-abiding people. With so much information so readily available on the Internet and so easily copied, distributed, recopied and redistributed, ad infinitum, many suppose online content is there for the taking."
IMHO Consent degrees suggest that a single, appointed judge in New York should decide who decides on what is a fair price for a song or for an ebook and whether or not the creator may negotiate. 
Film Producers Sue 16 Popcorn Time Users in Bid to Curb Piracy | PC Mag
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2490549,00.asp
IMHO, the suit against Popcorn Time USERS could be a turning point, because it is the viewers, rather than the piratical uploaders, who may be being pursued.
"Survivor Productions admitted that it had not personally identified the users, but had obtained IP addresses and their general location. The company also knows that they are Comcast customers and says it may be able to identify them with the provider's help."
Allegedly, Popcorn Time is "Netflix for pirated movies". Given the possibility that xfinity or u-verse service providers have the ability to help, this sort of piracy might not be worth the risk.
The MovieTube Litigation Part I: Who Needs SOPA? | Law Theories
http://lawtheories.com/?p=2269
IMHO, this doesn't sound like current, compelling reading.... but it is! Allegedly, MovieTube was a movie pirate site based in Singapore, and since the copyright owners had little chance of shutting the pirates down in Singapore, they parsed the existing DMCA (nothing to do with SOPA, which failed) and found arguments that an American court had the power to compel the American sites that made MovieTube possible (and perhaps profitable) to disable links to it.
"Nonetheless, a group of tech giants, comprised of Google, Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter, and Yahoo, filed an amicusbrief arguing that “the proposed injunction violates Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 and the safe-harbor provisions of the DMCA.” Specifically, the amici claim that an injunction against MovieTube couldn’t bind third parties such as themselves because Rule 65(d)(2) and Section 512(j) of the DMCA wouldn’t allow it."
IMHO, that is a weird. reading of Safe Harbor.  The tech giants weren't being fined, or anything like that. They were simply --as I understand it--being deprived of an illegal revenue source that they shouldn't have been exploiting in the first place.
This is a follow-on story:
Hollywood, Silicon Valley Sharpen Their Swords in Piracy War | Variety
http://variety.com/2015/digital/news/hollywood-silicon-valley-internet-piracy-1201572854/
Here's hypocrisy (exposed by Jonathan Lamy):
"Jonathan Lamy, spokesman for the Recording Industry Assn. of America, painted the anti-copyright forces as hypocrites. “During the SOPA debate, the common response was that existing law or agencies like the ITC were the appropriate ways to deal with overseas rogue websites,” he said. “Fast forward three years, and apparently those statements are ‘no longer operative.’ Our job is to hold them to their word.”
Of hairy legs and cross-hairs....
"of Carl Crowell, a one-man police force for Hollywood studios seeking to protect the value of their movies. He’s waging a battle against a widespread belief many Internet users hold: that content should be free, regardless of who produced it or under what conditions."
Go Carl!!!

Finally, if "finally" can refer to a steam of five more urls, here are a bunch of links to very much music related stories. I include them without further comment because, IMHO, authors--even alien romance authors--should watch what happens and has happened to the intellectual property rights of songwriters.  They are probably canaries in the coal mine.
The More Money Spotify Makes, The Less Artists Get Paid | Digital Music News
http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2015/09/03/the-more-money-spotify-makes-the-less-artists-get-paid-2/
A Stream on Apple Music Pays Songwriters And Publishers 33% More Than A Stream On Spotify | Hypebot
http://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2015/08/a-stream-on-apple-music-pays-songwriters-and-publishers-33-more-than-a-stream-on-spotify.html
WashingtonWatch: Pre-’72 Royalty Battle Adds Another New York Lawsuit | Grammy Pro https://www.grammypro.com/advocacy/news/washingtonwatch-pre-72-royalty-battle-adds-another-new-york-lawsuit
Radio Giants Facing Bicoastal Legal Demands to Stop Playing Pre-1972 Songs | Billboard
http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/6678790/radio-giants-facing-bicoastal-legal-demands-to-stop-playing-pre-1972-songs
What EMI’s six-month sample amnesty means for the music industry | The Guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/music/2015/sep/01/emi-sample-amnesty-means-for-the-music-industry
Have a profitable week,
Rowena Cherry

Monday, May 12, 2014

Opining On Last Week's News (relating to authors' rights)

The USPTO hosted a six-hour long forum last week with the noble goal of exploring whether DMCA TakeDown notices can be standardized in the interests of greater efficiency and accuracy.  

Videos are available here:  

Presentations were made by The Copyright Alliance, Google, EFF, Deviant Art, MPAA. RIAA, a fan-fic site and others.

Sensible ideas included a wish that the process could be fair, non-intimidating for those seeking to either enforce copyrights or dispute Take-down Notices. Copyright owners asked whether recipients of TakeDown notices could be encouraged to refrain from editorializing or otherwise stigmatizing senders of TakeDown notices.

(One example of this is the sad face that YouTube posts with a note naming the copyright claimant)

Many speakers and audience members asked everyone to consider the proposition that a TakeDown should be permanent, and the same ISP should not allow users to re-upload files that have been taken down. Representatives of smaller hosting sites pointed out that this could be expensive for them. Musicians and movie-makers pointed out that "whack-a-mole" places an unreasonable burden on creators.

Google explained their process which is designed through an online questionnaire to funnel complainants to the correct one of six forms for their DMCA purposes. It is reported (elsewhere) that Google receives a million TakeDown notices every day.

Much laughter ensued when one presenter showed how advertising sites force would-be copyright enforcers to view screen after screen of sexually charged advertisements and incontinence products (and also to solve Capchas) before they are able to reach a TakeDown form.

Aside... presumably the Diaper makers are paying for views and have no idea that they are wasting their advertising budget!


Amazon funny business....   Authors' Guild reports that the New York Times reports that, "In an apparent dispute over sales terms with big five publisher Hachette Book Group, Amazon is slowing delivery of select Hachette titles."

Hachette authors who see particular formats (ebooks haven't been reported as affected) of their own print works affected by long restocking times might like to contact AG.



Best wishes,
Rowena Cherry