« Berkman on Copyright in EU |
| Artists on P2P »
December 6, 2004
Blogs v. Big Media
The headline is a bit of a tease -- I'm not going to talk about how weblogs are better than/worse than and/or threatening/strengthening journalism as we know it. Too many others are doing a much better job at that than I could.
Here's what I'll do instead:
1.) Point you to a press release (republished verbatim) that, with all due respect to Internetmovies.com, I can't imagine being any less helpful for understanding the issues at stake: Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Yes, that's the headline that California Computer News chose for the release, presumably because it a.) didn't understand the content well enough to choose an appropriate headline, or b.) knows Googlers are interested in the DMCA.
2.) Point you to a weblog post by Joe Gratz on the very same news. As many of you know, Joe is a law student and a weblog writer -- a wonderfully clear, solid, precise writer, and consistently on top of the issues. Exhibit #2: Joe's fair use analysis for Fairtest.org, complete with gratis grammar check for the opposing party.
And with that, ladies and gentlemen of the readership, I'll rest.
Update: James Grimmelmann chimes in @ LawMeme on the Fairtest.org debacle Joe writes about in Exhibit #2, above:
The College Board's legal position is incorrect because:
A) The SAT's statistical profile is factual material, and is therefore not copyrightable.
B) To the extent that a test-taker's answers are copyrightable, the test-taker is the author, and not the College Board.
C) Even if the College Board held a valid copyright in the scores, FairTest's use of the statistics would be fair use.
D) All of the above.
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Laws and Regulations
- RELATED ENTRIES
- Why Make the Secondary Market?
- Lexi Alexander vs the Copyright Cartel
- Digital Homicide Studio v Fair Use
- The Art of Asking for "The Art of Asking"
- Two Copyright-in-Gaming
- Molly Crabapple's 14 Rules
- Should Copyfight Publish Stories to Benefit Charity?
- Eleventh Upholds Case-by-Case Infringement Review Concept