Home
17 items | 59 visits
The show notes for episode 83 of the Copyright 2.0 Show.
Updated on 2008-11-02
Created on 2008-11-02
Category: Others
URL:
-
- Preview
-
The settlement of the lawsuits, which were filed in 2005, did not resolve the question of whether Google’s unauthorized scanning of copyrighted books was permissible under copyright law.
-
Still, publishers were claiming victory, noting that under the settlement, publishers and authors must give permission for snippets of their in-print books to be included in Google’s search program. Google had argued that under the “fair use” doctrine of copyright law, it did not need such permission.
-
-
- Preview
-
While, technically, (and this point is arguable) these videos may be infringing, there's a good case to be made that they were fair use. They most certainly were not commercial in nature, and most clearly did not diminish the commercial potential of the works in question. In fact, Hersh named 3 of our friends who specifically had asked him who Xavier Naidoo was, so they could go find more of his music. Now Hersh can no longer promote Naidoo's music. That seems to go against everything that copyright is supposed to be about.
-
-
- Preview
-
But U.S. District Judge Xavier Rodriguez of Texas decided not to
follow U.S. District Judge Michael Davis' decision and ruled against
Harper. On Thursday, Rodriguez upheld (.pdf) his September decision (.pdf) in favor of the RIAA's motion for "summary judgment," legal jargon for winning a case without trial. -
"The court rejects defendant's argument that merely making
copyrighted works available to the public is not enough evidence for
summary judgment purposes to establish infringement," Rodriguez ruled
last month before the Thomas mistrial was declared.
-
1 - 17 of 17
Showing 20▼ items per page
List Comments
(0)
List Info
Sponsored Links
Ads by Google