Procol Harum was named after the band’s manager’s cat and is almost the Latin for ‘beyond these things’ (the correct Latin would be Procul Harum). OK, now that we got that out of the way, “A Whiter Shade Of Pale” was released in 1967. Now they are fighting over it. Today’s episode of SoundCheck on NPR discusses the creation of the song and the litigation, and plays the section of Bach’s “Air On A G String” that is incorporated in the song (podcast available from NPR shortly).
Other People’s Mail: YouTube Sends TechCrunch C&D
TechCrunch: “Huh? YouTube Sends TechCrunch a Cease and Desist.”
More on CopyBot / SecondLife
This is a video illustrating how a cloning program works on SecondLife. What you are seeing is explained in whats seems to be the most comprehensive account of the CopyBot incident from New World Notes, including an interview with the people who wrote the original program.
IPTABlog discusses the CopyBot rampage on SecondLife and provides a round-up of comments.
More discussion of CopyBot courtesy of TailRank here.
If You’re In Manhattan And Don’t Have Plans This Evening
. . . and you want to ask me questions about law blogging, then you can come hear me speak at the NY County Lawyers Association downtown (Vesey and Broadway), from 6 to 8 (details here).
CopyBot Terrorizing Residents Of SecondLife, Caught On Video
We have been following SecondLife, a popular virtual world, which has been gaining traction as a demo site for ‘real world’ product roll-outs, ‘remote’ conferencing and the like. A key point is that the digital creations, such as the appearance of avatars (the digital representations of the users) and the structures, have real value, not only in the resources that were expended to create them, but in that they are being traded in SL for a currency, the Linden, that has a real exchange rate to the dollar. Vendors are beginning to bet significant sums on SL creations.
Many are therefore disturbed by this report on the Linden Labs (the proprietor of SecondLife) blog that a program named CopyBot has been distributed in SL allowing the copying of any creation within an avatar’s proximity (sort of like the way the bad terminator in Terminator 2 could copy anyone he touched). Citing comments in the post thread, it appears that the significance of Copybot is that not only can it copy what is seen on the screen, but that it can copy underlying scripts that contribute to the item’s appearance (such as a script that generates the texture of a surface).
Thus an avatar dress shop becomes as vulnerable to counterfeiting as any real garment enterprise.
Someone in the comment thread posted a link to a YouTube video (embedded above) that purports to demonstrate one avatar taking on the features of another.
As we noted previously, certain types of IP problems would actually be easier to enforce in a virtual world, in that users enter into terms of service that allow the proprietor to pull the plug on a user who has mis-behaved (sort of like the bad guy who unplugged his crew members in Matrix 1). Note this second post from SL indicating that ujse of CopyBot is a violation of the SL TOS.
However in this case, it seems that SL can’t stop the distribution of the CopyBot program, nor tell quickly who is using it. One of the more interesting parts of SL’s first post is its request for suggestions as to what to do (and take the time to read the comment threads in both posts).
Of interest is SL’s remark in its second post that states “we are not in the copyright enforcement business.” It articulates the various factors it has to take into account to make SL an attractive environment. However, to the extent that it wishes to continue to be the host to an exchange, it will find that successful exchanges must offer security not only to buyers but to sellers. If copyrightable material is going to be bought and sold on Second Life, then I’m not sure that the real world copyright regime is fast enough to solve problems like CopyBot. I think that SecondLife is going to have to get into the copyright enforcement business.
UPDATE: Lots of commentary on CopyBot.
Some People Claim That There’s A Woman To Blame
Reuters: “Singer Buffett sues alleged trademark infringer.”
FIGHTING SIOUX Sue
The NCAA attempted to prevent the University of North Dakota from continuing its use of FIGHTING SIOUX as the names of its athletic teams. UND has sued the NCAA, alleging that the NCAA breached its obligations to UND in the manner in which the NCAA has applied its ‘Indian nickname’ rule. UND has succeeded at the interim relief stage
This website alleges that while there was support for changing the name, a wealthy donor (after whom a UND arena was subsequently named) demanded that the name be kept.
3200 Billables A Year?
Yeah, I got out the calculator when I read that too. Note what the in-house folk have to say.
Sort Of Like.com
Like.com performs image searches – you can use a photo of something, such as a watch (or a watch-face) as a search term. The benefit is apparent – as people do shop in real life for ‘shoes that have red straps’ and that sort of thing. The potential for knock-offs coming up in results seems apparent as well. I put in some famous trademarks, as well as words such as INSPIRED and STYLE, as search terms, and didn’t see any clear-cut infringements. Go play with it and see what you find.
NY Times article on Like.com here.
CounterfeitChic commentary here.
“The Farce Behind ‘Digital Freedom'”
News.com: “Perspecitve: ‘The Farce Behind ‘Digital Freedom‘” – Op-Ed on Consumer Electronic Associations’ digital freedom campaign, written by Cary Sherman, president of the RIAA.