The act of making available movies for P2P copying should itself give rise to damage liability, with no need for a showing that anyone actually came along and availed themselves of the illicit property, Hollywood moviemakers are arguing. “It is technologically infeasible to determine whether the public is copying an open share folder, although the RIAA makes its own downloads from defendants’ share folders, produces screen shots and, among other things, captures an IP address. An Arizona judge ruled last month in a different case that those downloads count against a defendant, a one-of-a-kind decision being appealed on grounds that the RIAA was authorized to download its own music.” Infringement penalties can run to $150,000 per copyright violation. (David Kravets, “MPAA Says No Proof Needed in P2P Copyright Infringement Lawsuits”, “Threat Level” blog, Wired.com, Jun. 20). More: Ars Technica.
Posts Tagged ‘copyright’
“He took the style and the delivery”
“Former heavyweight boxer Mitchell Rose has filed an $88 million dollar copyright lawsuit against Jay-Z in Brooklyn Federal Court, AllHipHop.com has learned.” Rose says he gave Jay-Z a demo tape in 2001 and that the musician took from it a style of rhyming, a “whispering” delivery, “and even certain lyrics” for which he should owe compensation. “Rose, 39, is also a personal injury lawyer who wrote a book called Mike Tyson Tried To Kill My Daddy.” (Nolan Strong, AllHipHop.com, Jun. 12). While we’re at it, my Manhattan Institute colleague John McWhorter has a new book out entitled “All About the Beat: Why Hip-Hop Can’t Save Black America“.
June 10 roundup
All-free-speech edition:
- Christiansburg, Va. land developer Roger Woody sues local bloggers and two other critics for more than $10 million for speaking ill of big dirt pile on one of his properties [Roanoke Times, editorial; more on Woody’s dealings]
- Lots of developments on free speech in Canada: trial begins in Vancouver in complaint against Mark Steyn and Maclean’s over book excerpt critical of Islam [his site]; after defending speech-restricting network of human rights tribunals, Conservative government in Ottawa now says it will take another look [Ezra Levant, with much other coverage including favorable nods from Toronto literati]; Alberta tribunal orders conservative pastor to “cease publishing in newspapers, by email, on the radio, in public speeches, or on the Internet, in future, disparaging remarks about gays and homosexuals.” [Levant; Calgary Herald; Gilles Marchildon, Egale.ca] (more, Eugene Volokh)
- Brief filed for Kathleen Seidel in her resistance of abusive subpoena, with assistance of Public Citizen [her site, theirs, and our comment section]; Seidel is among autism bloggers profiled in NY mag [w/pic]; profile of thriving Boston “vaccine injury” law firm” Conway Homer & Chin-Caplan [NLJ; Seidel’s critical comments on that firm]
- Views critical of religion unlawful unless expressed in respectful and non-scoffing way? Lots of precedent for that approach, unfortunately [Volokh on Comstock]
- Score one for fair use: judge denies Yoko Ono preliminary injunction against creationist film’s use of 15 seconds of John Lennon’s “Imagine” in context implicitly criticizing song’s point of view [Hollywood Reporter, WSJ law blog, Timothy Lee/Ars Technica]
May 28 roundup
- More on that New Mexico claim of “electro-sensitive” Wi-Fi allergy: quoted complainant is a longtime activist who’s written an anti-microwave book [VNUNet, USA Today “On Deadline” via ABA Journal]
- Your wisecracks belong to us: “Giant Wall of Legal Disclaimers” at Monsters Inc. Laugh Floor at Disneyland [Lileks; h/t Carter Wood]
- New at Point of Law: AAJ commissions a poll on arbitration and gets the results it wants; carbon nanotubes, tomorrow’s asbestos? California will require lawyers operating without professional liability insurance to inform clients of that fact (earlier here and here); and much more.
- Actuaries being sued for underestimating funding woes of public pension plans [NY Times via ABA Journal]
- City of Santa Monica and other defendants will pay $21 million to wrap up lawsuits from elderly driver’s 2003 rampage through downtown farmers’ market [L.A. Times; earlier]
- Sequel to Giants Stadium/Aramark dramshop case, which won a gigantic award later set aside, is fee claim by fired lawyer for plaintiff [NJLJ; Rosemarie Arnold site]
- Privacy law with an asterisk: federal law curbing access to drivers license databases has exemption that lets lawyers purchase personal data to help in litigation [Daily Business Review]
- Terror of FEMA: formaldehyde in Katrina trailers looks to emerge as mass toxic injury claim, and maybe we’ll find out fifteen years hence whether there was anything to it [AP/NOCB]
- Suit by “ABC” firm alleges that Yellow Book let other advertisers improperly sneak in with earlier alphabetical entries [Madison County Record]
- Gun law compliance, something for the little people? A tale from Chicago’s Board of Aldermen [Sun-Times, Ald. Richard Mell]
- Think twice about commissioning a mural for your building since federal law may restrain you from reclaiming the wall at a later date [four years ago on Overlawyered]
Yoko Ono vs. Ben Stein
“Doctor Who’s new enemy: the BBC lawyers”
“A Doctor Who fan who gave away knitting patterns which created vague recreations of the programme’s aliens has been threatened with legal action by the BBC for copyright infringement.” (Andy Bloxham, Daily Telegraph, May 14). More: Times Online.
“We also invented the color of ink”
J.K. Rowling vs. fan guide trial
RIAA hasn’t paid artists
“None of the estimated $400 million that the RIAA received in settlements with Napster, KaZaA, and Bolt over allegations of copyright infringement has gone to the artists whose copyrights were allegedly infringed. Now the artists are considering suing the RIAA.” (Consumerist, Mar. 17; David Utter, WebProNews, Feb. 29).
Reader Jim Finkel writes:
Having followed the RIAA lawsuits for a while, I found this most amusing. Even though I am not a lawyer, perhaps if the funds are NOT disbursed soon, there may be a bigger fraud suit. As the RIAA has ostensibly been collecting the monies for the artists, if the RIAA does not disgorge the funds, then they have been litigating under false pretenses. If RIAA expenses are so high that they have nothing left for the artists, then the artists may have grounds to countersue the RIAA for annoying the potential customers with so many frivolous lawsuits that the record business was destroyed, by the RIAA. That might be the ultimate irony.
By the way, for suggesting this suit, I would of course request my portion of the proceeds.
Earlier coverage here.