Kevin Smith, a scholarly-communications officer at Duke University, argued in a blog post that even though the publishers had revived their case, the appeals court had ruled against them on several important points:

  • The court agreed that potential copyright violations should be addressed on an “item by item” basis, rather than a “big picture” approach that would probably require Georgia State to purchase a “blanket license” to post e-reserve materials.

  • The court agreed that when evaluating whether e-reserve copying counts as fair use, it should be relevant that university libraries are nonprofit, educational institutions.

  • The court rejected the lower court’s “10 percent rule,” which drew a bright line on how much of a copyrighted work the university could make available free. The appellate judges instead advocated for “a more flexible approach that takes into account the amount appropriate for the pedagogical purpose.”

  • The court agreed that if a publisher had not made it possible for libraries to license excerpts of a copyrighted work, then libraries do not harm the market for the publisher’s products by copying the desired excerpts and making them freely available.

“These losses, which constitute the heart of what the publishers were hoping to achieve when they brought the lawsuit, are probably final,” wrote Mr. Smith.

Ga. State’s Loss in ‘E-Reserves’ Case Might Actually Be a Win for Librarians – Wired Campus - Blogs - The Chronicle of Higher Education

When intellectual property law experts cannot agree, we should not expect our history and math faculty to do justice to the fair use analysis each time. Instead, faculty will divide into two camps. One group will “throw caution to the wind” and use whatever content they wish in whatever form they desire, hoping never to raise the ire of the publishing companies. The other, out of an abundance of caution, will self-censor, and fail to make fair use of content for fear that they might step over a line they cannot possibly identify, and can never be certain of until a judge rules one way or the other. Either way, our students and the publishers lose out.

Ruling on copyright fair use will hurt professors, students and publishers (essay) @insidehighered

Google is updating its search engine technology to make websites that violate copyright law appear lower in search results. The Internet giant announced Friday that the update will roll out next week and target websites that have been flagged multiple times for copyright infringement.

Google tweaks search engine to combat piracy | TheHill

t was only in 1995 that Congress first established that copyright had any sort of “public performance” exclusivity — and then only for post-1972 recordings (remember, the recording industry itself has fought quite hard to exempt pre-1972 sound recordings from other aspects of federal copyright law) and only on digital streaming. So, to argue that pre-1972 state and common law somehow was intended to cover such a public performance right is almost impossible to fathom. Yet that’s what the court ruled.

How The Sirius XM Ruling Upsets Decades Of Copyright Law Consensus | Techdirt

Grooveshark’s defense has long been that it is legal under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the federal law that protects websites that host third-party material if they comply with takedown notices from copyright holders. But on Monday, granting summary judgment in a case filed in 2011 by the three major record companies, Judge Thomas P. Griesa of United States District Court in Manhattan ruled that Grooveshark was liable for copyright infringement because its own employees and officers — including Samuel Tarantino, the chief executive, and Joshua Greenberg, the chief technology officer — uploaded a total of 5,977 of the labels’ songs without permission. Those uploads are not subject to the “safe harbor” provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. “Each time Escape streamed one of plaintiffs’ songs recordings, it directly infringed upon plaintiffs’ exclusive performance rights,” the judge wrote in his opinion.

Judge Rules Against Grooveshark in Copyright Infringement Case -

This decision in California confirms what we have always known: All sound recordings have value, and all artists deserve to be paid fairly for the use of their music,” said Michael Huppe, chief executive of Sound- Exchange, a nonprofit group that collects royalties from digital radio services like Sirius XM and Pandora on behalf of artists and record companies. “It does not — and should not — matter whether those recordings are protected by state or federal law.

Sirius XM Loses Suit on Royalties for Oldies -

Kalev Leetaru has already uploaded 2.6 million pictures to Flickr, which are searchable thanks to tags that have been automatically added. The photos and drawings are sourced from more than 600 million library book pages scanned in by the Internet Archive organisation.

BBC News - Millions of historical images posted to Flickr

For the first time ever Google is now processing an average of one million removal requests per day. The new record follows an upward trend with copyright holders reporting more and more allegedly infringing search results in an effort to deter piracy.

Google Asked to Remove 1 Million Pirate Links Per Day | TorrentFreak

This legislation is about giving consumers more choices and options for their phones,” says our colleague George Slover, senior policy counsel for Consumers Union, about the passing of this bill. “Restoring the option to unlock a phone gives consumers the ability to pick another wireless service without having to give up a perfectly good, working phone for a new one. This legislation can help consumers save some money, and it can help drive competition in both mobile phone technology and wireless service.

Congress Finally Passes Bill To Re-Legalize Cellphone Unlocking – Consumerist

Map-makers are far from the only ones to use copyright traps. Dictionaries are frequent culprits: recent editions of the New Oxford American Dictionary included the word “esquivalience” (defined as “the willful avoidance of one’s official responsibilities”), which was later shown to be entirely made up, just to catch would-be plagiarists. Such lexicographical traps are sometimes called Mountweazels, after the entry for Lillian Virginia Mountweazel in the 1975 New Columbia Encyclopedia. Mountweazel was apparently a fountain designer-turned-photographer celebrated for her photographs of rural American mailboxes; alas, she never lived. Richard Steins, one of the volume’s editors, told The New Yorker: “If someone copied Lillian, then we’d know they’d stolen from us.”

Copyrighting Cartography with Fictional Places | Atlas Obscura