Slashdot Mirror
Google and Microsoft Help To Defend Fair Use
An anonymous reader writes "The Computer & Communications Industry Association filed a complaint this month with the FTC 'alleging that professional sports leagues, Hollywood studios, and book publishers were all using copyright notices that misrepresented the law'. That is, they were aggressively pursuing 'right' that they were not entitled to. Now a group, backed by companies like Oracle, Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, Sun, and Red Hat, has launched a web site called Defend Fair Use that shows they are serious about making the complaint stick. From the article: 'In contrast to copyright notices that take no account of fair use and claim control over "all accounts and descriptions" of a game, the CCIA offers a different copyright notice of its own. "We recognize that copyright law guarantees that you, as a member of the public, have certain legal rights," it says, "You may copy, distribute, prepare derivative works, reproduce, introduce into an electronic retrieval system, perform, and transmit portions of this publication provided that such use constitutes 'fair use' under copyright law, or is otherwise permitted by applicable law."'"
God damned time
Is where most of the public will stop reading. Granted, I think this is a great idea, but I imagine that they won't get it passed off with the wording as such.
Of course, at least one of those companies is selling/making money from systems that won't allow you to exercise your fair use rights...
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
Google and Microsoft? Going above and beyond the call of "Don't be evil"? Together?
Wonders never cease. Nice work.
IANAL but that sure sounds a lot like "tape recording/ripping movies and putting them on the internet" to me.
"Self-interest might well be among of their motives, too, as companies like Google and Microsoft are routinely sued over copyright-related issues. Defending fair use might be good for consumers, but it might turn out to be good for business as well." ....get an axe.
This unbiased moderation brought to you by the Porcine Aviation Group!
This Microsoft + Google alliance reminds me of that episode of He-man, where He-man and Skeletor have to join forces to save Eternia from this interdimensional monster - or when the guys from Dungeons n Dragons have to help Venger defeat Tiamat.
This is getting sooo interesting! *grabs some popcorn and enjoys the show*
It sounds like those entertainment lawyers DCMA'd one too many people. The lawyers start letting the fact that they were able to trample on the little people get to their head and eventually piss off someone big enough and with enough teeth to fight back. When SCO declared they were going to start charging $699 Linux licenses, it was the little guys who were concerned. Then they picked on Novell and IBM and look where they are now: Litigated into oblivion.
Overrated Moderation: This posts sucks... because.
So far the RIAA would object that "... such use constitutes 'fair use' under copyright law, or is otherwise permitted by applicable law."
So, no luck there.
Except Microsoft is the 21st Century Enigma. Nothing they do is without sneaky intent.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/07/08/29/1917221.shtml
That should be fair use as well. Don't bother replying with the legalese why it isn't. It should be.
damn hypocrites.
Am I the only one finding it ironic that Microsoft is demanding that Fair Use be recognized, while shutting down Autopackager and infringing on the right of first sale, even in cases where the software isn't even opened?
Sorry, I'm just frustrated that I spent thousands on two MSDN subscriptions and have been trying to activate them for a week, and have spent over 115 minutes on the phone, with the last two calls assuring me with 100% certainty that the problem is now resolved, only to discover they are STILL not activated and I have to call them yet AGAIN. GRRRRRRRRR!!! This is why I run Linux for everything except for client projects. Ugh.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
Didn't we decide this morning that Viacom has a shaky case for exactly this reason?
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
If everything were copyrighted (most things sort of implicitly are), and we upheld MLB's version of Fair Use, then lawyers' motions would be copyrighted and as such could not be discussed by other lawyers or judges. Nobody would be able to talk about anything that had been written down or produced in any way. One could even claim that all speech is a derivative work and we could only use words and letters that hadn't been used in the same combinations anyone has used in the last half century!
Nobody would be allowed to do anything because they would be sued by people who wouldn't be allowed to sue!
Now that I think about it, such inability to enforce anything would be like having no copyrights at all. One end of the spectrum is exactly the same as the other. Too bad circles are copyrighted.
Quick summary...
Karaoke is about 10 years behind the music industry, we *just* started getting PC based karaoke systems rolling.
2 karaoke companies have decided that copying a karaoke disc to your PC isn't covered under fair use laws. Below are their press statements.
ANTI-PIRACY CAMPAIGN STATEMENT 12/28/06
Stellar Records in a collaborative effort with some of its clients,
customers, law enforcement agencies, and in some cases even its competitors has
stepped up its campaign against piracy. As part of this campaign, Stellar will be
directing much of its attention at the venue level and soon will be taking
steps to notify suspected venues as to the potential risks and hazards
involved when using unauthorized copies of Stellar Records products.
Stellar Records, its customers, clients as well as several of its legitimate
competitors have been damaged considerably through the illegal copying and
distribution of their products, as well as other acts of piracy, some of which
pertain to the violation of trademarks that are also the property of
Stellar Records.
Prior to pursuing any further action, we do recognize the possibility that
at least some venues may not be aware of these violations and may be engaging
in these activities unknowingly. Hopefully this communication will provide
the information necessary in helping to determine if the use of a Stellar
Records product is authorized, or in any way infringes on its copyrights and/or
trademarks. At the very least, we hope this will provide the impetus to seek
legal advice on these matters before continuing to engage in these practices.
To be more specific, it has been brought to our attention that there are
several venues in the Phoenix and Scottsdale area that have been promoting
karaoke shows which are using unauthorized copies of karaoke products either
directly through the use of in-house systems or vicariously through the
contracting or employment of KJ/DJ hosts and/or hosting companies. Some of these
products have been identified as karaoke products containing the copyrights and/or
trademarks of Stellar Records including products bearing the trademarks "
Pop Hits Monthly", "Top Hits Monthly", or "Stellar Records". In addition it
has been suggested that there could be other products containing Stellar
Records' copyrights and/or trademarks being illegally distributed, and an
investigation is currently under way in an effort to identify those products as well.
In order to assist those in determining what constitutes an unauthorized use
of Stellar Records' products, please be advised that Stellar does not
support nor does it have the authority to support (due to contractual limitations
in its licensing agreements with various publishers) any device which stores,
and/or plays karaoke products from a hard drive or any device other than a
device that plays directly from a CD+G disc. For example products include but
are not limited to the CAVS JB199 as well as the RSQ-500 when play back is
not directly from a CD+G disc. There are a number of software based products as
well like MTU's Hoster, PCDJ, CompuHost, TriceraSoft, Sax N Dotty Show
Hoster, and Dart just to mention a few, when play back is not directly from a
CD+G disc.
Stellar Records does empathize with the concerns of some of its customers
who may want to make copies of their legally purchased products for the
purposes of making back-ups or to rip them onto a hard drive in a more convenient
format. However we do not have the authority to grant anyone the right to do
so. Most if not all of our karaoke products contain the copyrights owned by
parties other than Stellar, namely the writers, authors and/or publishers of
the work (song) itself to which we must seek prior approval for use in
producing our final karaoke products. The licenses and/or approvals that we secure
from these publishers do not include the right to distribute t
I'd applaud but I can almost hear "fair use allows us to distribute GPL software in violation of the license" machinations cranking away over in Redmond.
Let's wait and see where they're going with it before we give any kudos.
It's great, but a long way from anyone defending personal fair use. This is just corporations fighting over who gets to disseminate sports scores. In short, companies fighting over money. Just using fair use as the angle of attack.
Wake me when the megacorporations start fighting for my right to rip my CDs and play them on my MP3 player.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
I'm thinking Vince McMahon wants his hands on (Oracle, Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, Sun, and Red Hat) vs (Major League Baseball,RIAA,MPAA) wrestling match.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
I found it interesting to note that MS was backing a complaint against Dreamworks, you think they could sort that one out in-house.
thats what it should have been all along from the start !! great job you internet giants - now we can join in on this as the public and get things in their right places.
Read radical news here
The other publishing industries have been lagging behind the music recording industries. I have LPs from the lat 60s that claim rights that they STILL don't have. They threatened you with the FBI for taping them!
Those notices aren't nearly as funny as some of the other utter bullshit you see on CD cases of works that were originally in analog format, talking about CDs' "superior resolution" and how it wouldn't sound as good as the record company would like because they were analog. I actually believed this when I first started buying CDs, before I researched them. I had a few that made me wonder, and finally discovered that the remastering of some of these CDs is so bad that if you sample the vinyl and burn it to a blank, your home-sampled CD can actually sound better than the store bought version!
Also, the fact is that anything mastered in analog medium and reproduced digitally, or mastered digitally and reproduced in analog media will be the worst of both worlds and will sound like shit, or at least the digital analog of shit.
-mcgrew
PS- at 44,000 samples per second, a 15kHz wave will have only three samples per crest. Is that a sine wave, a square wave, or a sawtooth wave?
I'm tired of companies and organizations launching websites and being completely ineffective thereafter, as if the launch of the website itself was the brunt of their effort. I seriously hope they do something about this, but in my mind, just launching a website proclaiming your objective doesn't cut it. Let's see some results.
Could this be a reversal of Microsoft's prior stance on DRM, wherein they fellated the movie and music industries despite the consumer electronics industry being far larger and far more consumer-friendly?
Nah.
Sounds like it could also be a TIVO, or a local fileserver with rips of DVD's (I know people that have Terabyte storage just for ripping+archiving movies in a convenient manner)
"You may copy, distribute, prepare derivative works, reproduce, introduce into an electronic retrieval system, perform, and transmit portions of this publication provided that such use constitutes 'fair use' under copyright law, or is otherwise permitted by applicable law."
They appear to be taking a step in the right direction, until you take in to account that legislators go to the highest bidder... There is no question that M$ and Google have deep pockets and both company's lobby congress, its certainly no secret.
After they clean up the over-reaching copyright notices, maybe they could go after the EULAs next?
Have you tried turning it off and on again?
Finally some corporations recognize that the madness of the current abuse of IP rights has to stop. Perhaps their deep pockets will "convince" politicians to fix this (since they really don't give a rat ass notice of what people want).
People can go back to blogging sports events without getting thrown out of them. IIRC, the blogger from the paper in Louisville managed to get tossed out of the College World Series this year for blogging...
Can't you just smell the Claymation from wherever you're sitting?
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
them some money for their content (nobody EVER turns down money.)
If I was asking them for a PRICE for their Karaoke CDs/DVDs to play in a PC based player, I bet that I'd be able to license it.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Um... thanks, guys, and it's nice of you to say so publicly and all that, but I already had those rights, because the law said I had them. I don't need your say-so, or any corporation's. Just the law. Hard as it is to believe, the law is actually what gives us the right to do stuff, not your permission.
In determining whether the use made of a work
in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall
include--
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such
use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational
purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in
relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value
of the copyrighted work.
If the purpose of copyright is to allow authors some time to make money, but the author has given up trying to make money off the work, shouldn't copyright expire? I'm thinking of abandonware here . . .
While your words are aggressive, I agree about one point, the data mining.
... and as usual, ultimately, we are the pawns.
I suspect data mining is the true ulterior motive for both Microsoft and Google. Its why they want to support fair use. Its in their interests, as they want to data mine everyone and any copyright rules can get in the way of exploiting other people's information (especially if any of that datamining was based in turn, on copyright information).
Both Microsoft and Google stand to gain from the public continuing to have access to fair use of media data, as then Microsoft and Google can mine and profile all our views etc.. and sell that information onto anyone they wish.
But I love the way their PR teams spin the news, as if its all done in our interest. Like all companies, they do not do anything unless there are good business reasons to justify doing something. They are doing it for themselves, not for us. Its just one more business "chess" move for them
There are 10 kinds of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.
A site sponsored by MS, Google, and others and it looks like that? Must not be high on their priority list.
Did someone say cake?
That explanation is REDICULOUS(sic). I have a far more reasonable one, so allow me to elaborate.
Everyone *KNOWS* that Microsoft enjoys being evil precisely because they are evil! Or, at least, that is what people around here have told me. I have a feeling the people in Redmond drive into work like everyone else, but once they get into work, they start smiling. When they finally start working, they are chuckling to themselves: "Haha, its time to SCREW OVER THE WORLD! I can't wait to subtly break everything we've made, and inconvenience hundreds of thousands of users!" Because evil has this amazing ability to attract other forms of evil, thus allowing it to compound faster than one would expect, evil alliances are formed with alarming regularity: "Hmm, its Thursday, we should find a KKK club to sponsor since its been rather quiet this week." Naturally, everyone drives cool cars around the campus. Bill Gates is known to be able to fly, teleport, and destroy someone with a single thought of the mind. But few actually get close enough to him to observe these things, unfortunately.
I am sorry that this information is so long in coming. But I am glad I decided to post it on a site that is a beacon of truth, logic, and unbiased opinions.
Of course you can, provided that it actually falls under fair use provisions in the law!
..The question of what exactly counts as fair use is a little harder to answer, however. The media companies would like you to believe that the answer is "nothing", and force you to go to court to prove them wrong.
So for example, you can take a 10-second clip from a copyrighted nightly news show and post it to YouTube as long as it falls under fair use.
Has anyone actually looked at the website?
There's a link labelled "Tell us what you think" about fair use, overreaching copyright notices - but when you click it, the only option is to sign their pre-drafted petition. There's no way to actually convey your views. Much what you'd expect from these companies, really.
Then try reading the petition itself. Some idiot has failed to specify a proper charset for the web page, so it's peppered with weird characters.
Freakin' amateurs.
If someone says that they defend my right of way, but place their car in my path so that I cannot proceed, I will not believe their statement, because actions speak louder than words and their deed is incompatible with their words.
And when a company who has invested their precious money into assuring that only geeks can enact their rights by using their software, because only geeks can overcome the hurdles they have chosen to spend man hours on implementing, I will not believe them when they say they defend our rights. I will believe that their legal expenses related to those rights have now exceed the profits they intended to make by denying to their customers the means to excercise those rights.
There is a gigantic difference between "I defend your right on principle, but I will not intervene on your behalf" and "I defend your right, but I'll intervene so that you may not act on them if to the extent of my abilities". They took the initiative to place an obstacle, that is not compatible with a claim of intent to defend the right, not at all.
You can't take the sky from me...
Keep in mind that Microsoft is a huge violator of your privacy with the 47 spyware programs they put into Vista. Also the major WGN/WGA crap they put into Vista and XP. Bottom line is that they are not here to defend the rights of the people. Microsoft is doing this to defend their position alone so they don't get sued right and left. In fact, Microsoft years ago started buying up the rights to all sorts of digital works. They didn't do this to have them they did this to defend their rights. Nothing wrong with that except if you were to use those I'm sure they would be more than happy to bust your chops. For instance, the autopackager site they just shut down is a fair use site yet they have shit on everyone by closing it down. They did so because they know that such a site has little resources to defend themselves.
Never ever trust Microsoft.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
The sample you linked to is unpleasant, but most of us don't spend much time listening to pure sine waves at any frequency.
A better example of what sound in the 14-15khz frequency range has to offer would be to take a recording of an orchestra and do an A/B comparison of the original recording, and a version of the recording where an equalizer has been used to minimize those frequencies. The orchestra would sound "duller." Even though the fundamental notes the individual instruments were playing were of a much lower frequency, the overtones produced by acoustic instruments make up a lot of the tonal color people tend to like about them.
That being said, a version of a recording of an orchestra with the 14-15khz band boosted would tend to sound "harsher" than the original recording. Ideally, a recording should have the same amount of each audible frequency range of sound as you might experience in the room with the original instrument. And although a 15khz sine wave is not pleasant, there are pleasant things to be found in that range... you can play with a graphic or parametric EQ, either in software or in hardware, while listening to a CD to hear what I mean.
My truck is like a series of tubes.
These are all great sentiments. But the average person isn't a lawyer and doesn't understand exactly what is fair use. So just to be safe, they respond to any threat or reported threat and end up giving up their fair use rights. Nor do they have time to do the research to figure out whether a particular use they are contemplating is safe. Hmm, spend time with the family, or research fair use?
/K
The only way this is going to be solved is to spell out in very concrete, specific examples, what is clear fair use, what clearly isn't, and what's in the grey zone. If these companies really care about defending fair use, they'll do this. But of course, they might accidentally be construed to be giving legal advice, and they might even make a mistake, and be held liable. So just to be safe, they won't.
Argh!
Maybe I'm just optimistic but I'm very happy such large corporations are standing up to defend fair use. It might be for their gain but it benefits us as well! I mean, Google mainly just wants youtube to not suck. Anyway I created a facebook group because I'm bored. Mainly to spread the news about this website to the non-geeks. Please join! http://harvard.facebook.com/group.php?gid=56791052 12
Beware the wolf in sheep's clothing!
"And, for good measure, (and if there's time or screen space), they'll add "Any intent to apply or exercise of fair use rights shall be sumbitted in writing to the content license holder prior to such use, and approval or denial shall be determined at the sole discresion of the content holder except as determined in a court of law." See, now wasn't that easy?
I DON'T *THINK* SO...
On my blog I have a link to the actual complaint here and a link to a good article by Maura Corbett on C/Net News about the case here.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful