Copyright – Copyright Clearance Center Rights Licensing Expert Tue, 18 Dec 2018 21:30:16 +0000 en-US hourly 1 Copyright – Copyright Clearance Center 32 32 Scoreboard: 2018 Copyright Trends Fri, 14 Dec 2018 08:01:11 +0000 How did our predictions for copyright trends in 2018 stack up against reality? Read on for the wins, the losses, and more.

The post Scoreboard: 2018 Copyright Trends appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

This time last year, our experts made some predictions about what to expect in the world of copyright in 2018. Here is how those expectations stacked up to reality.

Trends that should grow: 4-1-2

  • Legislation: I’d like to see Congress pass one or more of the many pieces of Copyright legislation that are currently in the legislative hopper. We’ve posted about the CASE Act already; I continue to think the innovation it represents – an Alternative Dispute Resolution procedure for copyright cases under a specified dollar limit – is basically a good idea. Passing Senate 1010 (about the appointing procedure for Register of Copyright) might also be to the good; I’d also like to see the situation improved with regard to creators getting paid for the use of their music in the streaming environment (cf H.R. 1836, see also Rep. Collins’ (R-GA) ‘Music Modernization Act’). Scoreboard: Win. It was an active year for legislation. The Music Modernization Act passed, hearings were underway as recently as September for both Senate 1010 and the CASE Act.
  • Battling Behemoths: I’d like to see the issues in Oracle v. Google resolved. I’m not counting on that, though. (I’d also like to see the European Commission pass some of the copyright revisions that they have been working on bravely for a couple of years already; but I am not counting on that, either.) Scoreboard: Loss. Although Oracle v. Google and the European Commission made headlines throughout 2018, neither reached a conclusion.
  • Digitize and preserve: I’d like to see more digitization of older works and collections by organizations like HathiTrust, the DPLA. So long as the substantial and legitimate concerns of actual rightsholders are respected, I am a great fan of preservation and digitization — these activities contribute to the public good, which is one of the core goals of copyright (the other is incenting creators to create). Scoreboard: Win. DLPA scaled back its efforts, but overall this trend continued to grow in 2018.
  • Open Access: I’d like to see greater clarity from the US Administration on their approach to Open Access (OA) for the research outputs of projects funded with Federal money. It’s been a while since the public has had any updates or reaffirmations on this. Scoreboard: Win. OA made even bigger waves than we anticipated with the introduction of Plan S.
  • Creators: I’d love to see more individual creators, of all media types, thrive and prosper in the new year. “Shine on, you crazy diamond[s].” Let’s aim for more self-publishing successes, more young songsters getting their start through YouTube; more 3D-printed ThingsScoreboard: Tie. Self-publishing, YouTube and 3D printing may not have lived up to be the trends we anticipated, but creators still had a great 2018 with audiobooks and podcasts.
  • Peer-review: I’d like to see peer-review strengthened and made more efficient; I’d like to see the impact of predatory journals minimized, or fade from the scene entirely. This is one among many pressing issues in scholarly and scientific publishing, and you could do worse than to follow them on a daily basis here (Scholarly Kitchen). Scoreboard: Win. Peer-review is a key value-add for many publishers, and 2018 saw notable efforts to streamline the process (as well as an increasing distaste for predatory journals).
  • Try it before you buy it: I’d like to see more publishing experiments, more pilot projects, and more funding for both. These guys (Digital Science), for example, are doing amazing things. Scoreboard: Tie. We’re impressed by MIT’s PubPub, but overall this trend didn’t quite reach the heights we had hoped to see.

Trends that should dwindle or disappear: 2-1-0

  • Infringement: I’d like to see fewer poorly-based infringement suits in the entertainment industries clogging up the courts. Sometimes, it turns out that someone copied your stuff; and, assuming you have a good shot at proving it, we all (quite appropriately) have resort to the courts. Usually, though, it may simply seem like your idea was copied; and that by itself is simply not actionable under copyright. It seems like the last guy who won one of these was Art Buchwald, back in 1992. My view is similar regarding suits stemming from critical comments within YouTube postings. Too often, these may amount to attempts to restrict legitimate criticism. Don’t do that. Scoreboard: Loss. Unfortunately, 2018 didn’t see much progress here.
  • No Term Extension: I’d like to see no extension of the term of copyright in the US. It seems to me that if 95 years isn’t enough, nothing is. In other words, I’m looking forward to seeing more materials enter the public domain due to their copyright terms expiring, a year from now. Scoreboard: Win. No extension occurred, so a variety of fantastic content will enter the public domain on January 1, 2019.
  • Fact-driven policy: On a utopian note, I’d like to see less ideology and more practicality injected into copyright policy debates. But what are the odds of that happening? Scoreboard: Win. The utopian dream became a legislative reality when the common-sense Music Modernization Act passed unanimously and was signed into law. May 2019 and beyond bring more fact-driven public processes.

The post Scoreboard: 2018 Copyright Trends appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]> 0
The Seventh Triennial Section 1201 “Final Rule” has Been Issued Thu, 25 Oct 2018 07:02:19 +0000 Section 1201 exceptions are a topic of considerable discussion every few years. As it turns out, 2018 is one of those years.

The post The Seventh Triennial Section 1201 “Final Rule” has Been Issued appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

Update (Oct. 25, 2018): On a quick read of the 85-page “Final Rule,” it appears that more than 90% of the requested exemptions were granted. Exemptions for the purpose of media preservation did very well. Some very technical exemptions, those for avionics telemetry for example, were not granted; proponents for those can sharpen their arguments and come back in the next 3-year cycle. Overall, I believe that this iteration will stand as an outstanding instance of a fair and open public rule making process.

Update (May 7, 2018) : Public hearings on the 1201 rulemaking process were held  in Washington DC on April 10-13, and in Los Angeles on April 23-25, 2018. These all-day sessions included discussion about each  of the 12 proposed classes of exemptions, with groups on each side of each proposed exemption provided with time to argue for their view of the best policy to adopt. These groups included: Association of American Publishers (AAP), the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), various Universities, the Library Copyright Alliance, the Software & Information Industry Association, Public Knowledge, International Game Developers Association, and the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA).

In the next stages of the process, the Copyright Office staff will (in effect) go into a huddle and sort it all out, preparing recommendations which will then work their way up to the Acting Register of Copyright, Karyn A. Temple, whose responsibility is to make the final recommendations to the Librarian of Congress, Carla Hayden. This final step will likely occur sometime in the fall of 2018.

Further information about the status of the current 1201 rulemaking may be accessed here.

This article was originally published in March, 2018. 

Section 1201 is a curious little section of the US Copyright Act, added by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) of 1998. But the matter covered in that section is of great importance in our digital age and, due to its triennial rulemaking requirement, ‘1201’ exceptions are a topic of considerable discussion every few years. As it turns out, 2018 is one of those years.

For this (seventh) round the Copyright Office is trying out a “new, streamlined procedure for the renewal of exemptions that were granted during the sixth triennial rulemaking.” For this round, the Copyright Office has signaled its intent to streamline by taking into account exemptions which have been previously granted, and providing them a bit of a fast lane.

But let’s provide some context before digging in to these updates. One of the things that Congress realized at the time of passing the DMCA (1998)– and it’s something that Congress realizes all too infrequently – is that it was likely that technology would develop more quickly than laws and rules could be written to manage how the new technology would interact with everyone else’s rights and privileges. So Congress included within the DMCA a provision that became Section 1201 of the Copyright Act, under which the Copyright Office is instructed to update some of the ways in which technology and the law interact, by undertaking a rulemaking process every three years. That means hearing evidence and then granting – or denying –  specific exemptions from the limitations that the Copyright Act imposes on what users might do with works protected by copyright. The Copyright Office is now already in the middle stages of the seventh cycle of Section 1201 rulemakings (its conclusions are due to be published and effective at the end of October 2018).

This time through, twelve exemptions have been requested, with dozens of organizations weighing in. Among the exemptions requested are those that apply to different types of copyrighted works: audiovisual works (towards improving accessibility for specified purposes), computer programs (including unlocking smartphones for ‘jailbreaking’ and repair, as well as video game preservation) and two entirely new ones, one for flight-related software, and one involving an aspect of 3D printing. Some of these (particularly ‘jailbreaking’) have been frequently requested, and sometimes granted, before.

Some of these examples make immediate sense – for example, making licit the jailbreaking of phones has been written up quite a few times and nearly everyone (other than phone companies and manufacturers, of course) favors that in principle. Some video games and other older (consumer-facing) software are at risk of becoming completely inaccessible if the ability to ‘crack’ them open for examination, and running on modern devices, is somehow walled off by law. I myself favor, in general, what is sometimes called “the right to tinker,” which is to say that if I buy myself (for instance) a tractor, and I have alternative software that I wish to run on it in order to repair it, I should be able to do just that – at my own risk. It seems like overreach of copyright to use the all mighty c-in-a-circle to make me stick with what came shipped with the tool. I should be able to take my own chances with my own toy – even if it is a big toy, like a car or a tractor. The wisdom of this approach, however, is subject to debate. As a manufacturer, or a more cautious consumer, might point out, these are complicated machines, and if you don’t know who was writing that code you are installing, you might be opening yourself, and other people, up to problems you are not anticipating.

Of the 12 requested exemptions, two are new (to me at least): Class 11, Avionics, and Class 12, 3D Printing.

The proposed exemption for access to avionics data reads “A proposed exemption for access to aircraft flight, operations, maintenance and security data captured by computer programs or firmware. The digital avionics systems lock out access to collected aircraft flight, operations, maintenance and cyber security data necessary to comply with flight safety, maintenance and cyber security regulations and to maintain the safe and secure operation of an aircraft.” I don’t know enough about the field of avionics, including what are sometimes referred to as “e-Enabled aircraft,” to weigh in on the details, but as long as it doesn’t materially affect airplane safety I can see a valid argument for opening up the data systems and outputs here. Frankly, not to do so might amount to an anti-competitive policy (as well as a possible safety issue), and one that unnecessarily impedes technology innovation. But again, I don’t claim any expertise on these matters; it’s simply interesting, to me, to see the insertion of copyright issues into this mix. Did they anticipate such applications of copyright law at all, back in 1998?

The final request for exemption, in the domain of 3D Printing, reads, A proposed exemption for owners of 3D printers to circumvent technological protection measures on firmware or software in 3D printers to run the printers’ operating systems to allow use of non-manufacturer-approved feedstock.” I’ve long been fascinated with 3D printing. “Feedstock” is a jargon term for the raw materials used by the various 3D printer technologies, the most common of which are Selective laser sintering (SLS), Fused deposition modeling (FDM), and Stereolithography (SLA). Which is to say, plastics, metal powders and resins. The argument here seems like a descendant of the “toner wars” from traditional (2D) printing, whereby anticircumvention rules were used to prevent users from substituting aftermarket toner cartridges for laser printers. Under a 2017 Supreme Court Ruling, this sort of anti-consumer shenanigans are no longer allowed, and I’d expect a case focused on the supplies used in 3D printing to go the same way.

The next round of public hearings before the Copyright Office is coming up in mid-April. I’m looking forward to it; maybe we’ll see you there.

A version of this post originally appeared in IP Watch.

The post The Seventh Triennial Section 1201 “Final Rule” has Been Issued appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]> 0
Join CCC at the 2018 ACC Annual Meeting, #ACCAM18 Wed, 10 Oct 2018 05:28:32 +0000 Heading to Austin, Texas for the 2018 Association of Corporate Counsel (ACC) Annual Meeting? Here is a look at the events and sessions where you will find CCC.

The post Join CCC at the 2018 ACC Annual Meeting, #ACCAM18 appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

In just two weeks, my CCC colleagues and I will join legal counsel from around the globe when they meet up in Austin, Texas for the 2018 Association of Corporate Counsel (ACC) Annual Meeting. The conference is always a great opportunity to learn from and network with thousands of in-house lawyers on complex legal, regulatory, and business challenges.

I hope you can join us for our panel discussion #511: Managing Copyright Compliance in a Digital World on Tuesday, 23 October, 9:00 – 10:30 AM in Ballroom BC where my colleague Stephen Garfield, vice president, client engagement, will join Theodore Allen, senior director, intellectual property for Hologic, Inc., and Jeffrey Smith, associate director, contracts counsel for Shire, in exploring technology’s escalating impact on copyright infringement as well as the benefits technology can offer for managing compliance.

In addition to CCC’s session, here are a few other programs I’m looking forward to attending at the annual meeting:

GDPR’s First 100 Days: Lessons Learned – Monday, October 22, 11:45 AM – 1:15 PM

Regardless of industry, over the last several months, nearly all companies have been dealing with the rollout of the European Union’s enactment of the General Data Protection Regulation. This session will cover enforcement actions and explore changes companies may be making as a result. The speakers are encouraging participation from attendees so they can see where their company stacks up from a GDPR compliance perspective and develop a plan of action for handling changes in this evolving regulatory landscape.

Ethical and Legal Issues Posed by Artificial Intelligence – Monday, October 22, 2:30 PM – 4:00 PM

I’m looking forward to a dynamic discussion about the impact of artificial intelligence on existing ethical and legal frameworks. The session description promises recommendations for how in-house counsel can ensure they are supporting the use of AI to accomplish important business goals while ensuring they meet their ethical obligations.

Intellectual Property Protection for Emerging Technologies – Tuesday, October 23, 2:30 PM – 4:00 PM

This session promises to cover new and disruptive technologies such as big data, artificial intelligence, blockchain, 3-D printing, and virtual reality. It’s always exciting to hear how companies are handling game-changing innovation.

Visit CCC at Booth #311

In addition to the sessions above, I’m looking forward to meeting with CCC customers to learn more about how we can further support their compliance efforts. Bring all your copyright questions to booth #311 where our team will be on hand to discuss your latest challenges in managing copyright in the workplace.

All visitors will receive a free gift and those who scan their badge will receive 25% off a future OnCopyright Education Certificate Program.

View a complete 2018 ACC program schedule and other conference information here.

The post Join CCC at the 2018 ACC Annual Meeting, #ACCAM18 appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]> 0
U.S. Copyright News Must-Reads: Summer 2018 in Review Mon, 24 Sep 2018 08:00:38 +0000 Catch up on Summer 2018’s vital U.S. copyright news with headlines selected by CCC and Copyright Alliance from Newsweek, Rolling Stone, Reuters and more.

The post U.S. Copyright News Must-Reads: Summer 2018 in Review appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

Each quarter, Copyright Clearance Center and the Copyright Alliance team up to share a curated selection of important articles from the past few months on copyright issues in the U.S. Check out the following blogs and articles from summer 2018:

“U.S. appeals court revives case against CBS over pre-1972 recordings” from Reuters

Is a remastered track of an oldie substantially different enough to constitute a new creation with its own copyright protections? The answer determines whether royalties for use of the remastered track are due to the original musician, or to the producers of the new master. The 9th Circuit’s recent decision reversed a trial court opinion that the remastering process produced enough originality to warrant a new copyright, which had raised the specter that works could end up with eternal copyrights as long as they were remastered regularly.

“Senate Passes Music Modernization Act” via Variety

Recently approved by the Senate, new legislation supported by tens of thousands on social media continues on-track to become a law that would “fix” licensing and royalty legislation for the streaming era.

“The CASE Act is the Solution to the Alleged Copyright Troll Problem, Not the Cause” via Copyright Alliance

H.R. 3945 – the Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement (CASE) Act of 2017 – would offer a speedier “small claims court” for individual creators and small businesses that are victimized by infringement but can’t afford to enforce their rights in federal court. (Editor’s note: as of mid-September, the bill is waiting action in the House Judiciary Committee.)

“Appeals Court Won’t Take Up Copyright Decision That Raised Alarm About Embedding, Linking” via The Hollywood Reporter

A professional photographer’s image of Tom Brady went viral on social media, and in February a judge ruled that embedding social posts with the image constituted infringement. The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals denied an emergency appeal of that ruling as “unwarranted” (although it may be appealed in the ordinary course when proceedings conclude in the trial court).

U.S. Judge Claims Using Photo Found on the Internet is Actually ‘Fair Use’” via Newsweek

Some experts consider photography protections seriously at risk after a judge from the Eastern District of Virginia ruled that a film festival’s commercial use of an image found online (and flagged “all rights reserved”) was fair use.

Related Reading:

The post U.S. Copyright News Must-Reads: Summer 2018 in Review appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]> 0
Pop Copyright: Summer 2018 in Review Mon, 17 Sep 2018 08:00:45 +0000 How have recent appearances of copyright law in popular culture impacted literature, movies, pirates and the taste of cheese?

The post Pop Copyright: Summer 2018 in Review appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

Underestimate the reach of copyright law at your peril – it has influenced and continues to influence nearly every major industry in the global economy. Each quarter, we recap the surprising ways that copyright has entered into major world events and popular culture.

“Edam it! The taste of cheese cannot be copyrighted, court told” via Politico Europe

Although some tastes may be as recognizable as a famous work of art, a case in the European Court of Justice finds that copyright law does not protect the flavor of a food product.

“Copyright Suit Over Blackbeard Shipwreck Footage Sinks” via Bloomberg Law

Queen Anne’s Revenge is at the center of the conflict between the State of North Carolina and an underwater videographer who alleges that N.C. infringed on his copyright by using his footage of the shipwreck.

“Cox Settles Trailblazing Lawsuit That Demanded ISPs Get Tough on Piracy” via The Hollywood Reporter

Protections against copyright infringement can be the linchpin in preventing large-scale infringement of entertainment media from BMG, Universal and Warner.

“Appeals Court Won’t Take Up Copyright Decision That Raised Alarm About Embedding, Linking” via The Hollywood Reporter

Social sharing of photographs clashes with copyright protections in the case of a tweeted photo of Tom Brady.

“G.M. Used Graffiti in a Car Ad. Should the Artist Be Paid?” via The New York Times

Graffiti may be gaining respect in the art world, but its ephemeral nature combined with the frequent anonymity of its creators leads to ambiguities in the application of copyright protections.

Related Reading

The post Pop Copyright: Summer 2018 in Review appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]> 0
Copyright Legislation in 2018: 4 Pending Bills to Know About Mon, 20 Aug 2018 15:37:48 +0000 Copyright Alliance’s Keith Kupferschmid sizes up the prospects for four popular copyright-related congressional bills in the latter half of 2018.

The post Copyright Legislation in 2018: 4 Pending Bills to Know About appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.


For additional blogs by Keith and the Copyright Alliance team, please click here.

Back at the start of 2018, I reviewed several copyright bills pending before Congress and tried to predict which legislation might move forward this year. As we hit the mid-year mark and the legislative days remaining on the Congressional calendar dwindle, it makes sense to revisit these bills with an eye toward what may or may not move forward in the coming weeks and months.

H.R. 5447 and S. 2823, Music Modernization Act

Status Update: Music Modernization Act of 2018 Becomes Law

In January, I made the bold prediction that the bill “most likely to move forward in 2018 is actually one that wasn’t introduced until the end of 2017,” called the Music Modernization Act (MMA).

The MMA combines the previously introduced Music Modernization Act (MMA) of 2017, CLASSICS Act, and the AMP Act, and will, among other things, result in the most significant improvement of music copyright law in more than a generation. When passed, the bill will make it easier for creators across the music industry to earn a fair living through their creativity and will positively impact how music is licensed. It will enable legacy artists (who recorded music before 1972) to be paid royalties when their music is played on digital radio, and provide a consistent legal process for studio professionals – including record producers and engineers – to receive royalties for their contributions to music that they help to create.

The MMA has made its way through Congress steadily throughout 2018. There have been several bumps along the way, resulting in changes to the bill in the spirit of compromise, but none of these obstacles have proven fatal. Ultimately, the many diverse supporters in the music and technology industries, academia and the public continue to push Congress to repair a music ecosystem in need of fixing.

The diversity and breadth of support for the bill is so unheralded that it has resulted in unanimous passage in every instance it has been considered by Congress. Here’s a look at the timeline:

  • In April, the bill flew through the House Judiciary Committee by a vote of 32-0.
  • Riding that wave of support, two weeks later, the bill then passed the House of Representatives by a monumental 415-0 vote.
  • From there, it moved to the Senate, where it was considered along with its Senate counterpart S. 2823 by the Senate Judiciary Committee, which (following a May 15 hearing) passed a manager’s amendment to the bill by a unanimous voice vote in June. During the vote, a few issues were raised by Senate Judiciary Committee members that have now been, or are in the process of being, addressed by the stakeholders. While some of the issues are significant, as of the writing of this blog, most were either resolved or on a trajectory to being resolved in the coming days or weeks.

The bill continues to move toward a floor vote. With close to 50 Senate co-sponsors and more likely to join, it seems certain the full Senate will pass a revised version of the MMA when given the opportunity.

Because this legislation is different than the version that passed the House, if the Senate passes the revised bill, the bill must go back to the House for a vote. Given the results when the bill was first considered by the House, it seems certain that it will pass the House and then land on the President’s desk to be signed into law at some point later this year.

H.R 1695 and S. 1010, the Register of Copyrights Selection and Accountability Act of 2017

Status: Slow Progress

In April 2017, the House passed H.R. 1695, the Register of Copyrights Selection and Accountability Act of 2017, a bill that would make the Register of Copyrights a presidential appointee confirmable by the Senate, by an overwhelming 378-48 vote. At the time, this was a significant accomplishment, as it represented the most substantive, stand-alone copyright bill to pass through the House in a decade (since the PRO-IP Act, which passed in 2008). Of course, now this feat is somewhat less impressive when compared to the tremendous support received for the MMA in the House.

After passing the House, H.R. 1695 headed to the Senate for approval where it was joined by companion bill S. 1010. Instead of being referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, where virtually all copyright bills are sent, the bill was referred to the Senate Rules Committee. The Rules Committee rarely considers legislation relating to copyright or the U.S. Copyright Office, and therefore there was a significant learning curve for the Committee staff that took up most of the second half of 2017. At the same time, the Librarian agreed to pause her search for the next Register while Congress considers the legislation.

In April, the Rules Committee was continuing to consider the bill when Senator Thad Cochran, who chaired the Senate Appropriations Committee, retired. This sent a ripple through Congress that would result in Senator Shelby moving from the Chairman of the Senate Rules Committee to become Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, and Senator Blunt taking his place as the new Chairman of the Senate Rules Committee. As with any change in leadership, it takes time for the new Chairman and the Committee staff to get up to speed. But now, with staff in place and several months to consider the bill, it appears that that S. 1010 is primed to move forward by the Committee. Accordingly, time permitting, the Committee may act on the bill later this summer, and hopefully the full Senate can consider and pass the bill before the end of the year.

H.R. 3945, the Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement (CASE) Act of 2017

Status: Holding Pattern

Another bill that received a lot of attention and support in 2018 is H.R. 3945, the Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement (CASE) Act of 2017. This proposed bill would create a small claims board within the Copyright Office to provide copyright owners with an alternative to the expensive process of bringing infringement claims to federal court. This new board, called the Copyright Claims Board (CCB), would cap damages at $15,000 per work infringed and $30,000 total.

During the House Judiciary Committee markup of the MMA, Chairman Goodlatte and Ranking Member Nadler expressed support for marking up the CASE Act. Despite this strong bipartisan support, little opposition and support from tens of thousands of creators across the country, the bill has yet to be considered by the House Judiciary Committee. It is possible that the Committee may take up the bill when the House returns from its August recess, but there are so few legislative days remaining on the calendar that this is becoming more unlikely. Instead, it is more plausible that the CASE Act will be reintroduced next year as one of the first copyright bills to be considered by the Committee in early 2019.

S. 2559, Marrakesh Treaty Implementation Act

Status: Full Speed Ahead

In March, S. 2559, the Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired or Otherwise Print Disabled — which would amend U.S. copyright law to allow the U.S. to implement its obligations under the Marrakesh Treaty — was introduced in the Senate.

Both the Senate Judiciary and Foreign Relations Committees held hearings and unanimously passed the bill. Then, in late June, the full Senate passed S. 2559 by unanimous consent (and also provided its advice and consent for ratification of the Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who are Blind, Visually Impaired, or Otherwise Print Disabled).

After more than ten years without any copyright legislation being passed, it now seems like Congress is on the verge of passing as many as three copyright bills. And with the copyright legislative draught apparently over, and the Small Claims bill being teed up for next year, this momentum shows no sign of stopping.

Related Reading

The post Copyright Legislation in 2018: 4 Pending Bills to Know About appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]> 0
Understanding “The Rules” of Content and Information Sharing in a Global Organization Tue, 07 Aug 2018 06:57:37 +0000 Sharing information across a global enterprise should be encouraged, but it’s often stymied by old habits and information silos. Some… Read more

The post Understanding “The Rules” of Content and Information Sharing in a Global Organization appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

Sharing information across a global enterprise should be encouraged, but it’s often stymied by old habits and information silos. Some of the causes are:

  • Employees don’t know the rules for sharing information across functions and cultures, so they don’t communicate at all.
  • Departments don’t know what their colleagues are working on, so they don’t know with whom they should share. In these cases, similar projects might be duplicated in different regions and groups, duplicating the effort and spending.
  • People “information hoard” with the goal—whether conscious or unconscious—of protecting their jobs. They believe that if they share information, they’re giving up what makes them valuable. This is most prevalent in organizations that are increasing their outsourcing and offshoring.

As information professionals, we have greater insight into what departments are working on than other employees because they come to us with questions and research requests. We can break down silos and educate the organization about sharing information responsibly, for internal as well as externally published documents.

It’s best to reframe thinking about sharing from “Who needs to know?” – which is hard to define — to “Who’s not permitted to know this information?” This way, people eligible to know certain information can access it, even if we didn’t know they need it. There are three ways to start this transition.

1. Educate

Employees across the enterprise must be educated about what they can and cannot share. For information created in-house, determine if there a business, legal, or regulatory reason to limit access to certain people or departments. If the information was published externally, determine if you have the rights to share it. Always work with your legal and IT departments to help users understand compliance and security requirements.

2. Reward

Create rewards for global collaboration. In our organization, we traditionally put together end-user information services training and resources in the United States. This content would be shared with other regions, which each would adapt for their local users.

It worked, but it worked even better when we brought together a cross-functional global team to create a master set of global assets. Teammates from around the world participated on equal ground with U.S. teammates who had previously owned the process. The modular assets we created were the most comprehensive, effective, and ready-to-use we ever had. Being part of that leadership group rewarded our global teammates who hadn’t been recognized before, just by raising their visibility.

We’re still reaping the benefits. Our global teammates now are advocates for information services, take leadership in advancing our knowledge management objectives, and continue to generate innovations — even though the original team’s task is complete.

3. Trust

Remember that everyone is working for the same organization. Companies operating in certain regions prone to high employee turnover and IP protection issues can be reticent to share globally, even within their own organization.

Information professionals can address issues of trust by educating people about compliance and best practices, connecting the right people, and doing their part to engage employees across the globe. Employees all sign the same confidentiality agreements, and we should trust our employees to honor them. If we didn’t do this, we shouldn’t hire them or operate there. Engaging and valuing each employee so that they feel personally invested in the business can reduce the chance that they will walk away with our knowledge and share it where they shouldn’t.

Ready to learn more? Check out:

The post Understanding “The Rules” of Content and Information Sharing in a Global Organization appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]> 0
International Copyright News Must-Reads: Summer 2018 Mon, 09 Jul 2018 14:01:11 +0000 In a few minutes, catch up on vital international copyright legislation and court case news from Europe, Australia and Canada.

The post International Copyright News Must-Reads: Summer 2018 appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

As the summer season started in the Northern hemisphere, the global conversation about copyright heated up in a number of territories around the world. What happened, particularly, in Europe, Canada and Australia?

Europe: Proposed Copyright Directive for the Digital Age

As recently as on July 5th, we saw a step further in the long and somewhat winding road towards the updating of copyright rules for the digital age in the European Union. That day, the European Parliament voted not to endorse the report approved by its Legal Affairs committee on June 20th and to postpone until September consideration of the proposed new Copyright Directive after more discussions intended to take place in August (when most legislators are on vacation) and in the first weeks of September. At that time, if the then-draft legislation is approved by the Parliament (still a big if), the legislative process will take its next step, which is in negotiation by the Parliament with the other two EU bodies involved: the European Council (representing the EU’s Member States) and the European Commission (representing the European Union’s elected central administration).

Among other things, the proposed legislation creates a new right for news publishers to ensure they are fairly remunerated for the use of their work by sharing platforms and news aggregators. It also contains new measures to fight online copyright infringement, stronger negotiation rights for authors and performers and new exceptions to copyright for text and data mining, education and preservation by cultural heritage institutions such as libraries.

Resistance to the draft Directive from the large tech companies has been fierce and American-style lobbying has taken place, perhaps for the first time with this intensity in the European legislature. And it is not expected that that campaign will stop. In any case, if the Parliament in fact passes the legislation in September, and the negotiations with the Council and Commission are fruitful – none of which is definite – then final approval for the new law would not come before the end of 2018, at which point the EU Member States will then have to “transpose” the Directive into their individual national law, which will likely take two years or more.

According to Politico, Europe’s copyright fight is just getting started

See here the reaction from the Federation of European Publishers to the voting at the European Parliament on July 5th here.

And Billboard offers another take on the impact for the music industry here.

Canada: Royalties Settlement for Copibec

Copibec, the collective licensing organization for text works in Québec, has just published a notice about its recent settlement regarding copyright royalties with Laval University. This is the way in which both parties agreed last June to put an end to the legal dispute between them regarding copyright licensing for the university’s teaching and research activities.

Copibec had launched a class action against Laval in 2014, when the university refused to renew its Copibec license and put into effect an internal policy for the use of third-party works. Both parties now acknowledge that collective management offers important advantages and promotes academic freedom. The settlement (for which the notice, but not the actual text, has just been made public) remains subject to Court approval.

This is happening at a time when a review of the Canada Copyright Modernization Act is being conducted, and the collective licenses and fees from the other Canadian licensing organization for text works, Access Copyright, are being challenged by some education authorities and most universities in English-speaking Canada.

Australia: Copyright Modernization Underway

July 4th marks the final submission date for the consultation launched by the Australian Government on its projected “copyright modernisation”, which aims to bring up to date the Copyright Act of 1968.

Based on reports from the Productivity Commission, stakeholders have been able to contribute their views on the proposals to include new exceptions to copyright (for educational purposes, among others), regulate the use of ‘orphan works’ and how to handle conflicts between contract terms and the scope of exceptions.

See Hugh Stephens’ recent post on the International Publishers Association’s blog for a detailed account of the proposed changes and what is at stake in Australia, where the copyright review is expected to continue into 2019.

The post International Copyright News Must-Reads: Summer 2018 appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]> 0
Join CCC at #INTA2018 International Trademark Association’s (INTA) 140th Annual Meeting in Seattle Wed, 16 May 2018 09:06:45 +0000 CCC will be at INTA's annual conference to discuss international data privacy regulations, and how copyright can enhance your brand.

The post Join CCC at #INTA2018 International Trademark Association’s (INTA) 140th Annual Meeting in Seattle appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) will be among more than 10,000 brand owners, legal counsel, and government and IP professionals from 150 countries at the International Trademark Association’s (INTA) 140th Annual Meeting – the world’s largest and most widely attended trademark event.

This year’s annual meeting, May 19-23, at the Washington State Convention Center in Seattle, features over 300 educational opportunities in international trademark law and practice.  We invite you to visit CCC (booth #219) to talk about your team’s copyright challenges and how CCC solutions can help.

Join Christopher Kenneally on Sunday, May 20 (11:30am-12:45pm), as he moderates the panel More or Less Secure: Are International Data Privacy Regulations Helping You Protect Your Brand?

Panelists include Iris Geik, CCC’s Associate General Counsel & Privacy Officer, Anne Kelley, Center for Responsible Enterprise and Trade ( and Randi Singer, Weil, Gotshal & Manges, LLP. They will provide both an overview of the General Directive on Privacy Regulations (GDPR), which comes into effect on May 25, issues of implementing the GDPR and current best practices, and an in-depth look at the impact of those regulations on brand protection and corporate images.

On Monday, May 21 (1:15-3:15pm), CCC’s Iris Geik will also host the Table Topic: Copyright Can Enhance Your Brand: From Peter Rabbit to Marilyn Monroe.

Table Topics are a great networking opportunity to discuss topics of interest over lunch or breakfast with a small group of like-minded professionals.

INTA Annual Meeting Exhibit hours:

  • Sunday, May 20 10:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m.
  • Monday, May 21 10:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.
  • Tuesday, May 22 10:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.
  • Wednesday, May 23 10:00 a.m. – 2:00 p.m.

Be sure to stop by the CCC booth (#219) and say hello.

Not attending the conference? Follow all the action using hashtag #INTA2018 and connect with INTA (@inta) and CCC (@copyrightclear) on Twitter for up-to-the-minute dispatches from the conference.

The post Join CCC at #INTA2018 International Trademark Association’s (INTA) 140th Annual Meeting in Seattle appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]> 0
Tom Brady, Walt Disney and the Unexpected Copyright Cases of Early 2018 Mon, 09 Apr 2018 06:10:27 +0000 Over the past few weeks, The Walt Disney Company and Tom Brady, have each landed in the press over lawsuits involving copyright infringement.

The post Tom Brady, Walt Disney and the Unexpected Copyright Cases of Early 2018 appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

Superheroes and a Super Bowl hero are no strangers to media coverage. But over the past few weeks, The Walt Disney Company, producers of films including the Star Wars and Marvel franchises, and Tom Brady, five-time Super Bowl champion for the NFL’s New England Patriots, have each landed in the press over lawsuits involving copyright infringement.

The celebrity factor aside, there may not be much of an epic story to tell – yet – for either the Mouse or the GOAT, at least if we focus our attention strictly on questions of copyright.

Pull up a chair, and hold on while I make some popcorn.

Disney’s Distribution Battle with Redbox

In the Disney vs. Redbox case , on February 20th Judge Pregerson denied Disney’s request for a preliminary injunction which would have the effect of stopping Redbox from providing legally-obtained “codes” to consumers – these are certain 8-digit numbers, which are only usable once, that Disney has generated as a component part of DVD packages for their movies. The Judge labeled Disney’s request copyright misuse, and so – at this stage – his decision has the effect of allowing Redbox to continue. In effect, the Judge is implying that Disney’s effort to impede Redbox from doing what any purchaser of a copy of a work of intellectual property can do – such as resell that particular copy to someone else – is so far outside the bounds of an appropriate copyright infringement case, that it should not have been brought before him as one.

While the “wrongful distribution” alleged by Disney in the case may not, strictly speaking, be sufficient for this copyright claim, it does bring up some interesting questions. Specifically, if I, a copyright owner, put rules on the outside of the package of a copy of my work, saying (in effect) “Although you bought this box and its contents in a store, I only authorize you to open it on Tuesdays and only if your name is Tony Stark” – are you bound by that requirement? Why? At what point did you agree to my terms?

Related Reading: Copyright Law in 2017: 12 Big Court Cases to Know About

NFL Intellectual Property and the End of Embedding Tweets?

In the Tom Brady-related decision that came down in February, nine news organizations ran stories using an out-of-game image of Mr. Brady which had been taken in 2016 by a photographer named Justin Goldman. Goldman uploaded this image to Snapchat, which he had every right to do, as he had taken the picture of the celebrities in it while they were walking around a public place. Other people took this image and posted it to Twitter, where it “went viral.” At this point, the news organizations found the image a useful hook for a breaking story about some current events, and so they used it too. Judge Forrest found that this final step – the one taken by the news organizations – amounted to an infringement of the rights of the photographer/copyright owner. Flag on the play?

A number of copyright commentators have expressed their surprise at this result, which seems likely to be appealed.

[Bear in mind that federal court cases, including copyright cases such as this pair, begin at the district-court level. Decisions made at the district-court level do not carry precedential value outside their own districts; however, they are often appealed and these appeals sometimes result in a reversal of the original result. Appeals decisions have precedential value over much larger territories (the US is divided into only 12 courts of appeals; and they usually have persuasive value throughout the country.]


Interested in more recent copyright news? Check out:

Learn More: Explore CCC’s Copyright Certificate Courses

The post Tom Brady, Walt Disney and the Unexpected Copyright Cases of Early 2018 appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]> 0