Well the obvious answer to everyone's problem is have an attorney look at the contract. Entertainment attorneys can represent artists too. The $1000 or so dollars spent on an attorney is more than made up in the end.
Your litigation figure is underestimated by about 10X. Typically copyright or patent litigation attorneys fees ranges from $2-8 million per suit. However, you do get what you pay for so go with a better firm not the cheapest one.
(1) If you release it w/o the Univ.'s permission be prepared to pay the price. (2) Pay is irrelevant; check your contract/agreement that you signed when you started; a good attorney would argue that pay is not the relevant consideration but the degree and education is instead. (3) You can probably speak about your thesis, you just can't make copies and give away w/o permission of the University. (4) It should be illegal to think, period. Especially in grad. school. Good luck.
This question probably has an easy answer. As soon as the info was brought into the country, someone is violating copyright law. For example, the user is the copyright violator and the foreign country source is a contributory copyright violator.
Additionally, the courts of the US can probably bring the foreign company into the US for suit (ain't jurisdication a bitch! - attorney joke). So there are ways to sue foreign companies in the US even if no copyright laws exist in those countries. It only takes a creative attorney and a lot of money (much like everything else huh).
Finally my bar skills can be put to use!
1. First check your grad school contract/agreement to see if there is explicit work-for-hire language. Otherwise you can argue whatever you did is not a work for hire (and considering what they pay grad students these days, I wouldn't consider it hire - but maybe slavery - See 14th amendment).
2. Next ask them what happens if you never signed a contract. In other words, does your work automatically fall under the purview of your advisor who I know has signed a work-for-hire agreement if the Univeristy is smart.
3. If you have signed an agreement argue that it wasn't negotiable and is therefore invalid. See Restatement (Second) of Contracts if you are really interested in that argument.
4. Finally, one can always argue free speech. It goes further in the University setting than in the real world.
Good luck.
It always occurs to me that the people who complain the most know the least. Copyrights, much like patents, were created to facilitate
public disclosure of information. Imagine if an author had no protection of his book (i.e. stupid Harry Potter books for example). Most likely, the author and/or publishing company would never release the book since everyone could copy it. In other words, to get businesses to release there products you have to give them something. That something is of course money. Most economists tie all this up into the phrase"there is no free lunch."
The same argument goes for software too. MP3 and Napster issues are way too detailed for me to discuss here.
Also, I'll address the patent issues once another questions is presented. Cheers.
Slashdot Mirror
Well the obvious answer to everyone's problem is have an attorney look at the contract. Entertainment attorneys can represent artists too.
The $1000 or so dollars spent on an attorney is more than made up in the end.
Your litigation figure is underestimated by about 10X. Typically copyright or patent litigation attorneys fees ranges from $2-8 million per suit. However, you do get what you pay for so go with a better firm not the cheapest one.
You better look at the contract. Any argument is discounted if you or your advisor has signed an agreement as a work-for-hire.
(1) If you release it w/o the Univ.'s permission be prepared to pay the price. (2) Pay is irrelevant; check your contract/agreement that you signed when you started; a good attorney would argue that pay is not the relevant consideration but the degree and education is instead. (3) You can probably speak about your thesis, you just can't make copies and give away w/o permission of the University. (4) It should be illegal to think, period. Especially in grad. school. Good luck.
It all depends on the contract you signed and your advisors contract. Source of money is irrelevant.
It all depends on teh contract and your advisores contract. Money is irrelevant.
This question probably has an easy answer. As soon as the info was brought into the country, someone is violating copyright law. For example, the user is the copyright violator and the foreign country source is a contributory copyright violator. Additionally, the courts of the US can probably bring the foreign company into the US for suit (ain't jurisdication a bitch! - attorney joke). So there are ways to sue foreign companies in the US even if no copyright laws exist in those countries. It only takes a creative attorney and a lot of money (much like everything else huh).
Finally my bar skills can be put to use! 1. First check your grad school contract/agreement to see if there is explicit work-for-hire language. Otherwise you can argue whatever you did is not a work for hire (and considering what they pay grad students these days, I wouldn't consider it hire - but maybe slavery - See 14th amendment). 2. Next ask them what happens if you never signed a contract. In other words, does your work automatically fall under the purview of your advisor who I know has signed a work-for-hire agreement if the Univeristy is smart. 3. If you have signed an agreement argue that it wasn't negotiable and is therefore invalid. See Restatement (Second) of Contracts if you are really interested in that argument. 4. Finally, one can always argue free speech. It goes further in the University setting than in the real world. Good luck.
It always occurs to me that the people who complain the most know the least. Copyrights, much like patents, were created to facilitate public disclosure of information. Imagine if an author had no protection of his book (i.e. stupid Harry Potter books for example). Most likely, the author and/or publishing company would never release the book since everyone could copy it. In other words, to get businesses to release there products you have to give them something. That something is of course money. Most economists tie all this up into the phrase"there is no free lunch." The same argument goes for software too. MP3 and Napster issues are way too detailed for me to discuss here. Also, I'll address the patent issues once another questions is presented. Cheers.