Whether customers may copy their CDs onto their computers — an act at the very heart of the digital revolution — has a murky legal foundation, the RIAA argues. The industry’s own Web site says that making a personal copy of a CD that you bought legitimately may not be a legal right, but it “won’t usually raise concerns,” as long as you don’t give away the music or lend it to anyone.
. . .
The Howell case was not the first time the industry has argued that making a personal copy from a legally purchased CD is illegal. At the Thomas trial in Minnesota, Sony BMG’s chief of litigation, Jennifer Pariser, testified that “when an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song.” Copying a song you bought is “a nice way of saying ‘steals just one copy,’ ” she said.
NY State Dept of Economic Development v. I Love Santa Barbara (NDNY Dec 27 2007) (Appeal of TTAB decision denying NY’s opposition to use of “I (Heart) Santa Barbara).
NY Times: “Anarchists in the Aisles? Stores Provide a Stage“:
Otherwise known as reverse shoplifting, shopdropping involves surreptitiously putting things in stores, rather than illegally taking them out, and the motivations vary.
Anti-consumerist artists slip replica products packaged with political messages onto shelves while religious proselytizers insert pamphlets between the pages of gay-and-lesbian readings at book stores.
SHOPDROPPING is an ongoing project in which I alter the packaging of canned goods and then shopdrop the items back onto grocery store shelves. I replace the packaging with labels created using my photographs. The shopdropped works act as a series of art objects that people can purchase from the grocery store. Because the barcodes and price tags are left intact purchasing the cans before they are discovered and removed is possible. In one instance the shopdropped cans were even restocked to a new aisle based on the barcode information.
Slashdot: “Trekkie Sues Christie’s for Fraudulent Props“:
“Christie’s spokesman Rik Pike stood behind the authenticity of the auction and said the disgruntled buyer’s case had no merit. The lawsuit, filed in state court in Manhattan, demands millions of dollars in punitive damages and a refund for the visor and two other items Moustakis bought at the 2006 auction.”
Scotsman.com: “US Mogul Foils Web Name Hijack Scheme“:
An American multi-millionaire has come to the rescue of a Leith businessman whose website was hijacked by a hacker.
Internet mogul Bob Parsons owns the domain registry firm GoDaddy.com which web designer David Airey used to log his own site.
An Italian court ordered the animated bird, along with Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck and his girlfriend Daisy, to testify in a counterfeiting case.
In what lawyers believe was a clerical error worthy of a Looney Tunes cartoon, a court in Naples sent a summons to the characters ordering them to appear Friday in a trial in the southern Italian city, officials said.
Chuck Norris sues publisher of what might possibly be a humor book entitled “The Truth About Chuck Norris.”
Many pieces worth reading in the Lovells September (sic) newsletter I received today including:
“When Does a CTM Have A Reputation in the Community” by Verena Bomhard
“New Relative Grounds System for UK Trademarks” by Anat Paz
“Stopping Comparative Advertising in the UK” by Sahira Khwaja
“Russia’s Highest court Confirms H&M’s Success Against Company Name Hijacker” by Natalia Gulyaeva and Konstantin Bochkarev
“UK: Procedure To Objecting to a Company Name on the Basis of Goodwill” by David Latham
“German Supreme Court Rules Lottery Device to Promote a Savings Account is Legal” by Dr morten Petersenn.
Major League Baseball Properties v. Major League Moving and Associated Capital Services, 4:07 cv 565 (ED Texas Dec 19, 2007).
Hard to believe. Look forward to hearing how this turns out.