Feb 19
Citing too much information to digest, Judge Chin told a packed courtroom (actually two courtrooms - there was what was called an “overflow room” where people watched the proceedings on a monitor) that he would not rule yesterday on the fairness of the amended Google Settlement. He indicated that he would write an opinion, that he has an open mind and would listen to both sides of the argument as well as the US Department of Justice and both parties in the case.
Only five parties spoke in support of the settlement, mostly citing cultural and public welfare arguments, i.e., a thriving public culture needs access to copyrighted works, preservation of books in danger of being lost to time and age, etc.
More than 25 objectors took to the podium after the supporters spoke and covered, in some cases repeatedly, issues like privacy concerns about the information that Google would collect and ultimately use for their own end, the fact that Google violated current copyright law, and the problems with an opt out versus an opt in system on whether or not you were part of the settlement. These objectors included class members, foreign countries, lawyers, a consumer watchdog group, Amazon, and Microsoft.
The Guild from the very beginning has always considered Google scanning the books in question to be copyright infringement since they never sought permission from any of the rights holders prior to scanning. Google’s actions, along with the libraries that allowed the scanning, show a total disregard for creators’ rights and would create dangerous precedent if not challenged by the creative community. We hope the judge understands the very real concerns raised at the fairness hearing and does the right thing.
Feb 15
The Site for News About Copyright Infringement
Welcome to All Things Copyright. This site was formerly known as Orphan Works News, but it became clear to us at the Guild that a more formidable website was needed to address all types of challenges to copyright law. Artists and creatives everywhere are facing unique tests to their copyright ownership in the digital era, and this site has expanded its mission to address all the issues we face.
The latest dispute involved a website incredibly named Pilfered Magazine that openly stole and displayed visual art without permission of any kind. The name of the digital publication bragged of the theft and taunted the creative community. The alleged “creative director” and self-appointed “Robin Hood” for the masses argued that his unabashed theft of some 50 images was in service of “web democracy.” (See post at Copyright Alliance for more information).
The idea that creative work should be made available to the public at large without any payment or credit for the creator is growing at an alarming rate. This is where the war for creative integrity must be fought, and it can’t be limited to a single battleground. Large sectors of the public believe in a utopian vision in which they are enriched by the beauty of art, literature and music free of charge while the creators are impoverished. Such a model is unsustainable of course, but that won’t stop others from trying.
We’re pleased to report that Pilfered Magazine has been taken down, but ours is an era in which we can expect to see more of the same very soon.
That’s why All Things Copyright will be here. We’re here to inform creatives of the latest issues and threats to their rights. We’re here to inform the general public about how copyright works and why they should support it to provide market incentive for artists. We’re here to protect an industry that has been an inspiration to every generation of humanity and to ensure it remains for generations yet to come.
