THR, Esq. | Article Link
The issue presented in the case is whether the U.S. government wrongfully took many foreign works out of the public domain and violated the free speech rights of the American public by joining an international treaty.
Showing posts with label Publishing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Publishing. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Supreme Court Hears Arguments Over Whether To Restore Many Copyrighted Works To Public Domain
By Eriq Gardner
THR, Esq. | Article Link
The United States Supreme Court today considered arguments in Golan v. Holder, one of the most important copyright cases in the country's history and a case that will decide whether millions of creative works, including early-to-mid 20th century foreign masterpieces from H.G. Wells, Fritz Lang, Frederico Fellini, and Igor Stravinsky, will be copyrighted or in the public domain.
The issue presented in the case is whether the U.S. government wrongfully took many foreign works out of the public domain and violated the free speech rights of the American public by joining an international treaty.
THR, Esq. | Article Link
The issue presented in the case is whether the U.S. government wrongfully took many foreign works out of the public domain and violated the free speech rights of the American public by joining an international treaty.
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Harlan Ellison Sues Claiming Fox's 'In Time' Rips Off Sci-Fi Story (Exclusive)
By Eriq Gardner
THR, Esq. | Article Link
Legendary sci-fi author files copyright infringement lawsuit to stop the New Regency movie starring Justin Timberlake and Cillian Murphy.
Science fiction legend Harlan Ellison is attempting to kill a high-profile movie that is scheduled to come out in theaters next month. The Hugo award-winning writer has filed a lawsuit against New Regency and director Andrew Niccol over the 20th Century Fox-distributed film, In Time, starring Justin Timberlake, Amanda Seyfried and Cillian Murphy. He is demanding an injunction to prevent the film's October 28 release and the disposal of all copies of the film.
Monday, March 28, 2011
Oprah Escapes $100 Million Lawsuit Over Question About Fattest U.S. President
By Eriq Gardner
THR Esq. | Article Link
A judge finds Winfrey's question about 'Which one of our presidents weighed the most?' did not violate copyright of book author.
A federal judge in Pennsylvania has tossed out a book author's $100 million lawsuit against Oprah Winfrey for violating the copyright in the political booklet, How America Elects Her Presidents.
Charles Harris claimed in a lawsuit that in 2008, as Winfrey began supporting Barack Obama's presidential campaign, Harris sent 10 copies of his booklet to the The Oprah Winfrey Show in hopes of gaining publicity. He followed up with several inquiries. Harris got no response, but according to the complaint, on the February 16, 2009 show, Winfrey allegedly read aloud exact questions that were included in the book. Harris wanted in excess of $100 million for alleged copyright infringement.
THR Esq. | Article Link
A judge finds Winfrey's question about 'Which one of our presidents weighed the most?' did not violate copyright of book author.
A federal judge in Pennsylvania has tossed out a book author's $100 million lawsuit against Oprah Winfrey for violating the copyright in the political booklet, How America Elects Her Presidents.
Charles Harris claimed in a lawsuit that in 2008, as Winfrey began supporting Barack Obama's presidential campaign, Harris sent 10 copies of his booklet to the The Oprah Winfrey Show in hopes of gaining publicity. He followed up with several inquiries. Harris got no response, but according to the complaint, on the February 16, 2009 show, Winfrey allegedly read aloud exact questions that were included in the book. Harris wanted in excess of $100 million for alleged copyright infringement.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
No Sharing Allowed: Amazon & Book Publishers' Stupid Attempts to Curtail E-Book Lending
By Farhad Manjoo
Slate | Article Link
As convenient as they are, I've long worried about the many ways in which e-book purveyors restrict readers' rights. You can't resell the books you purchase for the Amazon Kindle, and you can't read them on most other e-readers. We also don't really own e-books in the same way we own paperbacks—Amazon has gone as far as remotely deleting titles from users' devices.
Lendle, a web clearinghouse for people who want to loan out and borrow Kindle books, tries to make lemonade out of this sour situation. Many Kindle titles can be loaned out once for a 14-day period. When you sign up for Lendle, you tell the site which books you have in your Kindle library. The more books you put up to lend to other people, the more books you're allowed to borrow. Everybody wins, right?
Slate | Article Link
Lendle, a web clearinghouse for people who want to loan out and borrow Kindle books, tries to make lemonade out of this sour situation. Many Kindle titles can be loaned out once for a 14-day period. When you sign up for Lendle, you tell the site which books you have in your Kindle library. The more books you put up to lend to other people, the more books you're allowed to borrow. Everybody wins, right?
NY Judge Calls Off Plans for Google Library
By Larry Neumeister
Associated Press | Article Link
NEW YORK – A judge on Tuesday rejected a deal between Internet search leader Google and the book industry that would have put millions of volumes online, citing anti-trust concerns and the need for involvement from Congress while acknowledging the potential benefit of putting literature in front of the masses.
U.S. Circuit Judge Denny Chin in Manhattan said the creation of a universal library would "simply go too far," and he was troubled by the differences between Google's views and those of everyone affected by the settlement. Still, he left the door open for an eventual deal, noting that many objectors would drop their complaints if Mountain View, Calif.-based Google Inc. set it up so book owners would choose to join the library rather than being required to quit it. The $125 million settlement had drawn hundreds of objections from Google rivals, consumer watchdogs, academic experts, literary agents and even foreign governments. Google already has scanned more than 15 million books for the project.
Associated Press | Article Link
NEW YORK – A judge on Tuesday rejected a deal between Internet search leader Google and the book industry that would have put millions of volumes online, citing anti-trust concerns and the need for involvement from Congress while acknowledging the potential benefit of putting literature in front of the masses.
U.S. Circuit Judge Denny Chin in Manhattan said the creation of a universal library would "simply go too far," and he was troubled by the differences between Google's views and those of everyone affected by the settlement. Still, he left the door open for an eventual deal, noting that many objectors would drop their complaints if Mountain View, Calif.-based Google Inc. set it up so book owners would choose to join the library rather than being required to quit it. The $125 million settlement had drawn hundreds of objections from Google rivals, consumer watchdogs, academic experts, literary agents and even foreign governments. Google already has scanned more than 15 million books for the project.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
