Copyright infringement cases can be both costly and time consuming. Considering copyright infringement is something that isn’t as easily defined as theft or speeding, there are numerous copyright infringement cases changing the way copyright law is viewed in the U.S. By reviewing a few of these copyright infringement cases, you can get a better idea of what is, and what is not, acceptable use of copyrighted works. As a forward, however, you’ll need to know something about copyright law. Most copyright lawsuits are brought to the courts because a copyright owner has found their copyright is being used outside the copyright laws. This usually means the copyright holder hadn’t been asked for permission to use the work; or if they had, the work is not being used in an agreed-upon context or they have not been paid royalties. The copyright infringement cases, listed below, sample of what goes to the Supreme Court in copyright infringement. Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service Co (6th Cir. 1996) This copyright infringement case was brought to the Supreme Court in 1996 regarding the copyright of a database. The Supreme Court, in this instance, decided that compilations of data (such as in a database) are only protected by copyright when they are “arranged and selected in an original manner.” Although the level of originality needed to make the database copyright-able is not very high, the pages of a directory (such as a phone book) are not protected because the data contained therein is arranged geographically, then alphabetically. Because of this, the data was not original enough to warrant a copyright infringement charge. The competing telephone company was allowed to tap into their competitors’ database and use that data in their own work without liability. Princeton University Press v. Michigan Document Services, Inc (6th Cir 1996) This case has to do with the Fair Use law, which is defined in the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 107. In this case, a photocopying service was sued for copyright infringement for making “course packs” for the University of Michigan. In this case, a course pack was a group of reading materials assigned by a professor — then the course pack was bound together by a professional copy shop. In the Fair Use system, there is a system available for payment of copyright fees to publishers whose works are used in course materials. The printing shop owner refused to pay the copyright cost. When it went to the Supreme Court, they analyzed the Fair Use code and found that it was NOT Fair Use, and the printing shop had to pay the copyright costs. As you can see, copyright infringement cases are cases in which someone violates the rights of a copyright owner, as provided by 17 USC §106, or of the author as provided in §106A. These copyright infringement cases can be taken to either criminal or civil court, and can carry with it a hefty fine. Copyright infringement cases are brought upon people who violate copyrights every day. In recent times, you’ll find many copyright cases in relation to electronic copyrights — such as those you’d find on a website or PDF file, as well as other digital media such as music and audio files. It’s probable that you’ve seen copyright cases brought against the common person — such as a child or family — for downloading digital music in the form of MP3s. In the current Internet age, it’s not surprising to see so many music and video copyright cases brought to us because of peer to peer file sharing made possible by the Internet. You can be certain that until people know the rules of copyright, and downloading copyrighted material from the Internet, we’ll see many more copyright cases.
Posts Tagged ‘Copyright’
The Criminal Copyright Infringement Case Against Kifah Maswadi: Case 1:08-Cr-00037-Tse Usa V. Maswadi
Product DescriptionKifah Maswadi, 24, of Oakland , Fla. , was sentenced to 15 months in prison for selling pirated video game systems. Maswadi previously pleaded guilty on June 3, 2008 , to a one-count indictment for criminal copyright infringement, after being indicted on Jan. 24, 2008 . Maswadi admitted to selling “Power Player” handheld game consoles that were pre-loaded with at least 76 pirated copies of copyright protected video games, most of which were owned by Nintendo and Ni… More >> The Criminal Copyright Infringement Case Against Kifah Maswadi: Case 1:08-Cr-00037-Tse Usa V. Maswadi
Posted in Software Piracy 
Tags: 108Cr00037Tse, Against, Case, Copyright, Criminal, Infringement, Kifah, Maswadi 
Comments OffCopyright And Related Rights – An Overview
What is Copyright? Copyright is concerned with protecting literary, artistic or scientific work of the human intellect. These include books, wallpapers, pamphlets, catalogues, maps, guides and other writings, music, works of the fine arts such as paintings and sculptures, lectures, addresses, and works of like nature, Dramatic, dramatic musical works, Chronographic works, dumb show, Musical composition, Architecture, sculpture, drawings, engravings, lithographic, phonographic works, Translations, adaptations and technology based works such as computer programs and electronic databases. Copyright is based on the concepts of originality and reproduction of the work in any material form. Therefore the main criterion for the protection of a work under copyright laws is that it should beoriginal (Not copied). Accordingly copyright laws confers the exclusive right to the owner of the “original” literary, artistic or scientific work to use or authorize others to use it for its reproduction, public performance, translation and adaptation. It is to be noted that copyright protects a work that is the expression of thought based on some idea, and not for the idea as such. For example if I have the idea of painting “sunset over the sea”, anyone else can use the same idea, which is not protected. But when I actually produce my painting of “sunset over the sea” the painting itself is expression, and that is protected. Copyright provides a bundle of rights. The most typical are the following: the right to copy or otherwise reproduce any kind of work; the right to distribute copies to the public; the right to rent copies of at least certain categories of works (such as computer programs and audiovisual works); the right to make sound recordings of the performances of literary and musical works; the right to perform in public, particularly musical, dramatic or audiovisual works; the right to communicate to the public by cable or otherwise the performances of such works and, particularly, to broadcast, by radio, television or other wireless means, any kind of work; the right to translate literary works; the right to rent, particularly, audiovisual works, works embodied in phonograms and computer programs; the right to adapt any kind of work and particularly the right to make audiovisual works thereof. Copyright is a protection that covers published and unpublished literary, scientific and artistic works, musical work, cinematographic films, software etc. Whatever be the form of expression, such works should be fixed in a tangible or material form. This means that if you can see it, hear it and/or touch it – it may be protected. Originality: Originality in relation to a work means that it is the author’s own creation and is not copied totally or essentially from another work. Originality is required by copyright law for the composition of the contents as well as the form of their expression , but not in relation to mere ideas, information or methods embodied in the work. Originality is not to be confused with novelty: the pre-existence of a similar work unknown to the author does not affect the originality of an independent creation. In the case of a derivative work, originality resides in the individual method of adaptation of the pre-existing work as referred to, among others, in Article 9 of the Mexican Law. The requirement of originality as a condition of copyright protection is expressed in many national copyright laws by qualifying protectible works as “original”. This sense of the attribute “original” should not be confused with the meaning of the term when used to oppose original works as pre-existing works to derivative works. LITERARY, ARTISTIC, MUSICAL AND SCIETIFIC WORKS Strictly speaking, literary work is writing of great value from the standpoint of the beauty and emotional effect of its form and content. From the point of view of copyright, however, a general reference to literary works is commonly understood as meaning all sorts of original written works, be they of a belletristic, scientific, technical or merely practical character, irrespective of their value or purpose. But an artistic work (or work of art) is a creation intended to appeal to the aesthetic sense of the person perceiving it. The category of artistic works comprises paintings, drawings, sculptures, engravings, and in several copyright laws also works of architecture and photographic works. Although in some countries musical works are considered to be a special category of protected works, in many copyright laws the notion of artistic works comprises musical works too. Works of applied art are in most legislation likewise included in this category. Musical works are also protected by copyright. Such works comprise all kinds of combinations of sounds (composition) with or without text (lyric or libretto), to be performed by musical instruments and/or the human voice. If the work is also intended for stage performance, it is called a dramatico-musical work. Music usually forms part of cinematographic works too. The author of a musical work is generally referred to as the composer. The most frequent uses of musical works for which protection is granted under copyright laws are reproduction (as sheet music or recording), performance, broadcasting other forms of communication to the public, arrangement and use as background music. Copyright laws making protection subject to fixation in material form only protect music written in musical notation or recorded appropriately Another area of importance is scientific works. Scientific work deals with problems in such a way as to correspond to the requirements of scientific approach. The coverage of this category of works is not at all restricted to the field of natural sciences or to literary works of a scientific character. A computer program could under certain circumstances also be a scientific work. In copyright laws, a general reference to scientific works is often understood as meaning all kinds of works other than artistic or fictional, such as technical writings, reference books, popular scientific writings, or practical guides. However, scientific works protected by copyright do not comprise scientific inventions, discoveries, research work or scientific undertakings. Why to protect a work by copyright? Even though the work is protected by the fact of its creation some sort of proof is needed which can be obtained by the registration of the work under copyright law of the nation. In civil-law countries, the work is typically protected from the moment of its creation. On the other hand under common law you need have to have it fixed in some way, perhaps written down or recorded on tape. It implies thatthe work has to be fixed before it is protected. The difference here is really not that important, it is basically a question of the kind of proof you would need in a court in the very rare cases of works that are not fixed in the normal way. There are no “international copyrights’ that enable you protect your work throughout the world. However, most countries are members of the Berne Convention and the Universal Copyright Convention (UCC), which allow you to protect your works in countries of which you are not a citizen or national. In Berne Convention countries, all foreign owners of rights or authors from other Berne countries qualify for protection under the Convention without any formalities, so there’s no need to make any registration. Under these treaties, the following works may be protected (i) both unpublished and published works of an author who is a national or resident of a country that is a member of these treaties; or (ii) publishedworks, with permission, of an author who is not a national or resident of a country that is a member of these treaties. In this case a work may be considered simultaneously published in several countries if it has been published in two or more Berne Union countries within 30 days of its first publication Berne Convention: Berne convention established in 1886 is the oldest international convention concerning copyright. The Convention, concluded in 1886, was revised at Paris in 1896 and at Berlin in 1908, completed at Berne in 1914, revised at Rome in 1928, at Brussels in 1948, at Stockholm in 1967 and at Paris in 1971, and was amended in 1979. The Convention is open to all States. Instruments of ratification or accession must be deposited with the Director General of WIPO. It is to be noted that WTO Members, even if they are not party to the Berne Convention (e.g., Indonesia), must comply with the substantive law provisions of the Berne Convention, except that WTO Members not party to the Berne Convention are not bound by the moral rights provisions of the Berne Convention. It should also be noted that developing and “transition” countries may, at least until 2000, delay the application of most of the obligations provided for in the TRIPS Agreement (Article 65). Naturally, States party to the Berne Convention cannot delay the application of their obligations provided for in the Berne Convention. The Berne Union has an Assembly and an Executive Committee. Every country member of the Union which has adhered to at least the administrative and final provisions of the Stockholm Act is a member of the Assembly. The members of the Executive Committee [...]
Copyright & Music Piracy
The principle that the work one has created belongs to the creator and should be controlled by them is a global concept. This principle is encoded in Copyright law. Copyright Law is the key element upon which intellectual property rights are created and it is from these property rights that musicians, composers, artists and authors derive their income. The U.S. Constitution Art. I Sec. 8 Cl. 8, lays the foundation of Copyright law by providing that “The Congress shall have Power… to Promote the Progress of Science and the useful Arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.” As a copyright owner, an author would have certain exclusive rights over his works such as the Reproduction right (the right to make copies), the Adaptation right (the right to adapt the work into new works – such as translation of the work into a different language), the Public Distribution right (right to distribute copies of the work to the public), the Public Performance right (right to perform the work publicly – such as reciting the novel to the public) and the Public Display right (the right to display copies of the work in public). Copyright law thus prohibits the unauthorized duplication, adaptation or distribution of a creative work. The Copyright statute does not define the tem “musical work.” A musical work is understood to comprise of both the music and the words that accompany it. All genres of music are covered by the term musical work. A musical work is different from a sound recording. The difference lies in the fact that a musician who composes music or writes a song is the author of a musical work, while a producer who records some sounds creates a sound recording. The term Piracy is used to describe the deliberate infringement of a copyright on a commercial scale. Music Piracy refers to the illegal duplication and distribution of sound recordings. It mainly comprises of four specific forms – (i) bootleg recordings, (ii) pirate recordings, (iii) online piracy and (iv) counterfeit recordings. Bootleg recordings refers to the duplication, recording, and sale of a performance such as a live concert or broadcast without the permission of the artist or the Record Company which may be entitled to control the recording rights of the artist’s performances. Pirate recordings refer to the unauthorized duplications of music from legitimate recordings for commercial gain. The packing and presentation of a pirate copy does not usually resemble a legitimate commercial release. Online piracy refers to the unauthorized transfer of sound recordings from Internet sites. Counterfeit recordings are the unauthorized copying of the sound as well as the artwork, trademark, label and packaging of the original recording. The main aim of counterfeit products is to mislead the consumer into thinking that they are buying the genuine product. The U.S. Recording Industry is represented by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). With a mission to foster a business and a legal climate to support and promote its members’ creative and financial vitality, the RIAA members create, manufacture and/or distribute approximately 85% of all legitimate recordings produced and sold in the United States. The RIAA is working to protect the intellectual property rights and First Amendment Rights of artists, conduct consumer, industry and technical research; and monitor and review state and federal laws, regulations and policies. One of the primary objectives of the RIAA is educating people about music piracy. The RIAA states in simple words that going online and downloading music without permission is as good as walking into a store and shoplifting. A report published by the Institute of Policy Innovation provides that global music piracy causes $12.5 billion of economic losses every year, 71,060 U.S. jobs lost, a loss of $2.7 billion in workers’ earnings, and a loss of $422 million in tax revenues, $291 million in personal income tax and $131 million in lost corporate income and production taxes. Considering the amount of loss that the music industry faces mainly because of piracy, one might wonder whether there is a provision to get access to one’s favorite songs without being held liable for piracy. The answer is “YES!” Legal downloading of music is extremely easy and cost effective. The RIAA states that record companies have licensed hundreds of digital partners offering download and subscription services, cable and satellite radio services, Internet radio webcasting, legitimate peer-to-peer or P2P services, social networking services, video-on demand, podcasts, CD kiosks and digital jukeboxes, mobile products such as ringbacks, ringtunes, wallpapers, audio and video downloads. The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry or the IFPI which represents the recording industry worldwide states that there are more than 10 million licensed tracks available on more than 400 services worldwide. The IFPI represents 1400 members across 72 countries and has affiliated industry representations in about 44 countries. The IFPI reports that about 40 billion files were illegally file-shared in the year 2008 giving a piracy rate of about 95%. What happens when a composer or owner of a sound recording finds out that his work is being reproduced digitally without his permission? The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 or the DMCA as it is popularly known provides the answer to this question which probably haunts most of the artists today. The Internet, which is providing a gateway of access to almost anything that seems to be created, is posing a threat to the artists who find their works being “uploaded” or “downloaded” without their permission. This invariably infringes the exclusive rights provided by the Copyright Act which was enacted to protect the interests of the artists. The DMCA has enacted § 512 (c) which is more popularly known as the Safe Harbor Provision which provides a method by which an online service provider can limit his liability for vicarious infringement for illegal infringing copyrighted works stored on his system by the website’s subscribers. §512 (c) takes birth from the district court decision in Religious Technology Center v. Netcom On-Line Communication Services, 907 F.Supp. 1361 (N.D. Cal. 1995), which refused to hold an ISP liable for the infringing activities of its users because the ISP’s role consisted entirely of serving as a passive conduit for the transmissions of its users, without in any way inducing, influencing, encouraging or selecting among their infringing activities. For an online service provider to be eligible for protection under the Safe Harbor provision, he can appoint an agent with the Copyright Office. If an owner believes that his copyright is being infringed, he can send a notice to the online service provider. Once such a notice is received, the online service provider must either remove and/or disable access to the allegedly infringing material. After receiving the online service provider’s notice, the subscriber can send a counter notification. If the subscriber fails to respond to such a notice, the infringing content remains disabled or removed. If the subscriber provides a notification, this will be conveyed to the copyright owner. Litigation is initiated by the copyright owner against the alleged infringer and a notice to this effect should be sent to the online service provider. If no such action is taken by the copyright owner after receiving the counter notice, the online service provider must repost the disable or removed material within 2 weeks of its receipt of the counter notification from the subscriber. If litigation is initiated by the copyright owner, the online service provider must remove or disable the infringing material until it is resolved by the court. Whom does the law hold responsible? According to 17 U.S.C §501(a) ( c ) of the Copyright Act, copyright infringement occurs when a party engages in importing copies or phonorecords into the United States in violation of §602. Secondary Liability for copyright infringement is also enforced although it is not expressly recognized in the Statute. Secondary Liability occurs in the following two forms – Contributory and Vicarious Liability. Under Secondary Liability, the defendant can be found liable for copyright infringement even though he did not personally engage in the infringing activity. However, to enforce an action under secondary liability, an underlying act of direct infringement must occur. Contributory infringement is designed to target intentional contributions to infringement. Two key elements that pave the way for contributory infringement are (a) knowledge of the infringement and (b) continued substantial and material provision of means. The concept of contributory liability for copyright infringement was laid down in Gershwin Publishing Corp. v. Columbia Artists Management, Inc., 443 F.2d 1159, 1162 (2d Cir. 1971). The court expressly held that “One who, with knowledge of the infringing activity, induces, causes or materially contributes to the infringing conduct of another, may be held liable as a ‘contributory’ infringer.” Id. A video rental store which permitted its customers to view its videos in the store was held to be contributorily liable for those infringing performances. Columbia Pictures Indus., Inc. v. Aveco, Inc., 88 F.2d 59 (3d Cir. 1986). Vicarious [...]