McCain's Memo in Motion to Dismiss Jackson Browne's Copyright Suit

Memo from McCain’s Motion to Dismiss Copyright Action brought by jackson Browne re McCain campaign’s use of ‘Running on Empty.’
A. Browne’s Copyright Infringement Claims Are Barred By The
Fair Use Doctrine
1. The First Factor, The Purpose And Character Of The Use,
Favors McCain Because The Use Was Made In A Non-
Commercial Political Message About Matters Of Public
Concern And Was Transformative
2. The Second Factor, The Nature Of The Copyrighted Work,
Favors McCain
3.The Third Factor, The Amount and Substantiality Of The
Use, Favors McCain
4.The Fourth Factor, The Effect Of The Use On The Potential
Market For Or Value Of Plaintiff’s Work, Favors McCain
B. Browne’s Lanham Act Claim Fails As A Matter Of Law
1.The Lanham Act Does Not Apply To Political Speech
2.Browne’s Lanham Act Claim Is Barred By The “Artistic
Relevance” Test Imposed By The First Amendment
3.As A Matter Of Law, There Can Be No Likelihood Of
Confusion Stemming From The Political Video


Harry Potter Lexicon Case Appealed

The Stanford Law School Center for Internet and Society will represent the defendant in the appeal of the Harry Potter Lexicon case, discussing whether defendant’s ‘Lexicon’ of the Harry Potter books constitute fair use.


"Google Settles With AAP. Authors Guild"

Publishers Weekly: “Google Settles with AAP, Authors Guild“:

Google has reached an out-of-court-settlement with the Authors Guild and the AAP involving two separate lawsuit brought by the organizations against Google’s Library Search program that made scans of books from libraries, including books under copyright. The settlement includes a $125 million payment by Google plus the establishment of a new licensing system.


Prof Lessig: In Defense of Piracy

WSJ: Lessig: “In Defense of Piracy“:

How is it that sensible people, people no doubt educated at some of the best universities and law schools in the country, would come to think it a sane use of corporate resources to threaten the mother of a dancing 13-month-old? What is it that allows these lawyers and executives to take a case like this seriously, to believe there’s some important social or corporate reason to deploy the federal scheme of regulation called copyright to stop the spread of these images and music? “Let’s Go Crazy” indeed!


"No Matter How Much You Dislike John McCain, He Can Most Likely Use Your Song"

Techdirt: “Dear Bands: No Matter How Much You Dislike John McCain, He Can Most Likely Use Your Song“:


"Anime, Moral Rights and Market Failure"

Joshua Daniels: “Lost in Translation’: Anime, Moral Rights, and Market Failure“:

This Note examines the process by which Japanese anime series are translated, dubbed, and distributed in the United States, with a particular focus on cases in which the dubbed version has been heavily edited from the original source material. These heavily-edited dubbed versions are often commercial failures because they are rejected by many U.S. fans who are familiar with the original Japanese version of the series through the consumption of illegal “fansubbed” versions. Even though these transactions seem wasteful and thus should be avoided, their occurrence on several different occasions over the years is difficult to explain.
HT Copyright Law Twitter
This Note argues that these cases are the result of a failure of the anime licensing market to take into account the legitimate interests and expectations of U.S. fans in the integrity of the series, which ought to be considered even though the moral rights of the original creators technically might not be infringed. Drawing upon prior scholarly literature which justifies the fair use defense in copyright law as a means of curing market failures, this Note proposes the adoption of a limited fair use defense for infringing “fansubs” where the authorized dubbed version of the series has been heavily edited and there exists no other legal means by which U.S. fans may enjoy the series in its original form in the United States.


Can't Blog About Times Article On Girl Talk

I see the article, I want to comment on the ‘substituting creativity for your own’ comment, but then I start playing Feed the Animal, people come into my office, they say ‘is that ‘Body Movin’ by the Beastie Boys, we look at the list of the samples, somebody else comes in, they hear the Radiohead sample, then it’s forty minutes later.


Text of Decision in 2d Circuit Remote DVR decision

Cartoon Network v Cablevision, 07-1480-cv (2d Cir August 4, 2008).


Redlasso, News Clip Service, Sued, Closes

Redlasso, News clip service, sued, closes.


"Best Fair Use Practices For Online Video"

Center for Social Media: “Fair Use and Online Video“:

Remixes, mashups, fan tributes and other creative work burgeoning in online video often use copyrighted material without permission or payment. When is it fair to do so? In many cases, creators can employ fair use, a key feature of copyright law. Welcome to a code of best practices in fair use for online video, and to studies and other information that help you understand the importance of fair use in maintaining an open door for tomorrow’s creativity.For deeper resources, including teaching materials, background on the law, video examples of fair use in action, and other codes of practice, go to centerforsocialmedia.org/fairuse.