MUSIC & DIGITAL MEDIA (Spring 2014) - ST Test | h2ocopyright | January 14, 2014

H2O

This is the old version of the H2O platform and is now read-only. This means you can view content but cannot create content. You can access the new platform at https://opencasebook.org. Thank you.

MUSIC & DIGITAL MEDIA (Spring 2014) - ST Test

Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright Show/Hide

Mr. Christopher Bavitz
Spring 2013 Seminar | Tues 5:00pm – 7:00pm | WCC Room 3036 | 2 Credits

This course explores legal issues relating to the creation, exploitation, and protection of music and other content. It focuses on traditional regimes and models and the ways new technologies have affected strategies involved in making and distributing content. The seminar balances doctrinal and policy concerns with day-to-day legal and business practices and skills relevant to practitioners.

EDIT PLAYLIST INFORMATION DELETE PLAYLIST

Edit playlist item notes below to have a mix of public & private notes, or:

MAKE ALL NOTES PUBLIC (10/10 playlist item notes are public) MAKE ALL NOTES PRIVATE (0/10 playlist item notes are private)
  1. 1 Show/Hide More INTRODUCTION: Copyright Basics and Incentives for Creation (Spring 2013)
    Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright

    TOPICS
    Overview of expression, nature of creativity and authorship, and rights-ownership.
    What are the goals of our copyright system?
    How do those goals fit in with the interests of:
    – creators?
    – consumers?
    – those who build businesses on distribution of content?
    Basic copyright concepts relevant to musical compositions and sound recordings.
    What works are covered by copyright?
    What rights does the owner of a musical work possess?

    READINGS (BARGFREDE / MAK)
    Ch. 1, History of the Music Industry and Copyright Law, pp. 3 – 15
    Ch. 2, Current Copyright Basics, pp. 17 – 38

    1. 1.1 Show/Hide More Lawrence Lessig, Remix, Bloombsbury Academic (2008) (CC BY-NC 3.0), Ch. 1, "Introduction"
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      Notes:
      Source: http://www.bloomsburyacademic.com/view/Remix_9781849662505/chapter-ba-9781849662505-chapter-0001.xml;jsessionid=FF7F25C75D42F66DA23F17F809558987 (visited: December 5, 2011)
    2. 1.2 Show/Hide More Eldred v. Ashcroft, 537 U.S. 186 (2003) (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      Eldred v. Ashcroft, 537 U.S. 186 (2003) (Excerpts)
    3. 1.3 Show/Hide More 17 USC § 102
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    4. 1.4 Show/Hide More 17 USC § 106
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    5. 1.5 Show/Hide More 17 USC § 501 (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    6. 1.6 Show/Hide More 17 USC § 107
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    7. 1.7 Show/Hide More ONLINE ONLY (Spring 2013)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      1. 1.7.1 Rick Carnes, "Has Music Piracy Killed the 'Recording Artist'?," The Huffington Post (January 3, 2011)
      2. 1.7.2 "Copyright Criminals," Independent Lens (PBS), PBS "Community Classroom" Video Module 1: "Hip-Hop and the Birth of Sampling" (video)
      3. 1.7.3 Allan Kozinn, "Sony Issues Dylan CDs to Extend Copyright," New York Times (January 7, 2013)
      4. 1.7.4 Prachi Gupta, "Did 'Glee' rip off Jonathan Coulton’s cover of 'Baby Got Back'?," Salon (January 18, 2013)
    8. 1.8 Show/Hide More OPTIONAL (Spring 2013)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      1. 1.8.1 U.S. Copyright Office, Circular 1, "Copyright Basics" (.pdf)
      2. 1.8.2 Peter B. Hirtle, "Copyright Term and Public Domain in the United States, 1 January 2012," Cornell University Copyright Information Center (CC BY 3.0)
      3. 1.8.3 Neil W. Netanel, "Copyright and the First Amendment; What Eldred Misses - and Portends," from Neil Weinstock Netanel, Copyright and Free Speech: Comparative and International Analyses, Oxford University Press (2005) (available at SSRN)
  2. 2 Show/Hide More RIGHTS FRAMEWORK AND SCOPE OF PROTECTION (1 OF 2): Musical Compositions (Originality / Similarity / Infringement / Fair Use) (Spring 2013)
    Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    TOPICS
    Overview of originality / protectability / copyrightability:
    - What are the elements of a musical composition?
    - What makes a musical composition protectable under copyright law?
    Infringement of musical compositions — access, substantial similarity, etc.
    Under what circumstances does one infringe another’s rights in a musical composition?
    Role of expert witnesses in infringement cases.
    Sampling of musical compositions.
    Fair use of musical compositions.

    1. 2.1 Show/Hide More Tisi v. Patrick, 97 F.Supp.2d 539 (S.D.N.Y. 2000) (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    2. 2.2 Tisi v. Patrick, Case No. 00 CIV. 0882 (RWS) (S.D.N.Y.), Lawrence Ferrara, Report re: Sell Your Soul and Take a Picture (March 6, 2000)
    3. 2.3 Ronald S. Rosen, Music and Copyright, Oxford University Press (2008), pp. 400 - 414 (.pdf)
    4. 2.4 Show/Hide More Federal Rule of Evidence 702
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      Notes:
      Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_702 (visited: December 5, 2011)
    5. 2.5 Show/Hide More Federal Rule of Evidence 703
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      Notes:
      Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_703 (visited: December 5, 2011)
    6. 2.6 Show/Hide More Federal Rule of Evidence 704
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      Notes:
      Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_704 (visited: December 5, 2011)
    7. 2.7 Show/Hide More Federal Rule of Evidence 705
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      Notes:
      Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_705 (visited December 5, 2011)
    8. 2.8 Show/Hide More Repp v. Lloyd Webber, 858 F. Supp. 1292 (S.D.N.Y. 1994) (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    9. 2.9 Show/Hide More Repp v. Lloyd Webber, 132 F.3d 882 (2nd Cir. 1997) (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    10. 2.10 Show/Hide More Newton v. Diamond, 204 F.Supp.2d 1244 (C.D. Cal. 2002) (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    11. 2.11 Show/Hide More Newton v. Diamond, 349 F.3d 591 (9th Cir. 2003) (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    12. 2.12 Newton v. Diamond, Case No. 00-04909 (NM) (MANx) (C.D. Cal.), Rule 26 Expert Disclosure by Defendants Michael Diamond, Adam Horovitz, Adam Yauch, Beastie Boys, Capitol Records, Inc., Grand Royal Records, Inc., Universal Polygram Int'l Pub., Inc., Brooklyn Dust Music and Mario Caldato, Jr. (July 30, 2001), read pp. 1 - 9 and 12 - 13
    13. 2.13 Show/Hide More Bourne v. Twentieth Century Fox, 602 F.Supp.2d 499 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    14. 2.14 Henley v. Devore, Case No. 8:09-cv-00481-JVS-RNB (C.D. Cal.), Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (June 10, 2010) (.pdf), read Section I (pp. 1 - 3) and Sections III(A)(1), III(A)(1)(i) (pp. 5 - 19)
    15. 2.15 Show/Hide More Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 US 569 (1994) (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    16. 2.16 Show/Hide More OPTIONAL (Spring 2013)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      1. 2.16.1 Show/Hide More Bright Tunes Music Corp. v. Harrisongs Music, Ltd., 420 F.Supp. 177 (S.D.N.Y. 1976) (Excerpts)
        Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      2. 2.16.2 Show/Hide More Jorgensen v. Epic / Sony Records, 351 F.3d 46 (2d Cir. 2003) (Excerpts)
        Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      3. 2.16.3 Show/Hide More Jean v. Bug Music, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3176, 2002 WL 287786 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 25, 2002) (Excerpts)
        Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      4. 2.16.4 David J. Prince and Gary Graff, "Coldplay, Satriani Copyright Lawsuit Dismissed," Billboard.com (September 15, 2009)
      5. 2.16.5 Randy Lewis, "Beach Boys vs. Katy Perry? A warning, not a lawsuit," Pop & Hiss, The L.A. Times Music Blog (August 5, 2010)
      6. 2.16.6 Ben Sheffner, "Henley, DeVore settle lawsuit; Henley rails against remixes and mash-ups, YouTube, 'dark side' of Internet; songs are not 'toys or playthings'," Copyrights & Campaigns (August 5, 2010)
      7. 2.16.7 Henley v. Devore, Case No. 8:09-cv-00481-JVS-RNB (C.D. Cal.), Lawrence Ferrara, Report re: (1) "The Boys of Summer" as recorded by Don Henley and "The Hope of November" and (2) "All She Wants to Do Is Dance" as recorded by Don Henley and "All She Wants to Do is Tax," read pp. 1 - 5 and 13 - 18
      8. 2.16.8 Henley v. Devore, Case No. 8:09-cv-00481-JVS-RNB (C.D. Cal.), Declaration of Lawrence Ferrara in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (April 8, 2010) (.pdf), read Pars. 1 - 5; 31 - 33; 44 - 47
  3. 3 Show/Hide More RIGHTS FRAMEWORK AND SCOPE OF PROTECTION (2 OF 2): Sound Recordings (Originality / Similarity / Infringement / Fair Use) (Spring 2013)
    Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright

    TOPICS
    Scope of federal and state law protections for sound recordings.
    - Federal law protection for recordings first fixed after February 15, 1972.
    - State law protection for pre-72 recordings.
    History and origins of common law rights / preemption by the Copyright Act.
    Infringement and sampling of sound recordings.
    Fair use of sound recordings.

    READINGS (BARGFREDE / MAK)
    Ch. 3, Copyright in Music, pp. 39 – 51

    1. 3.1 Show/Hide More Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films LLC, 410 F.3d 792 (6th Cir. 2005) (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    2. 3.2 Show/Hide More Saregama India Ltd. v. Mosley, 687 F. Supp. 2d 1325 (S.D. Fl. 2009) (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    3. 3.3 Show/Hide More 17 USC § 412
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      Notes:
      Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/usc_sec_17_00000412——000-.html (visited: December 6, 2011)
    4. 3.4 Show/Hide More 17 USC § 504 (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      Notes:
      Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/usc_sec_17_00000504——000-.html (visited December 6, 2011)
    5. 3.5 Show/Hide More Capitol Records, Inc. v. Naxos of America, Inc., 4 N.Y.3d 540 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005) (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    6. 3.6 EMI v. Premise Media, Index No. 610209/08 (NY Sup. Ct., NY Co.), Order (August 13, 2008) (.pdf), read pp. 1 - 3; 6 - 19
    7. 3.7 Federal Copyright Protection of Sound Recordings Fixed Before February 15, 1972, Library of Congress, 75 FR 212, 67777 - 67781 (November 3, 2010) (.pdf), read pp. 67777 - 67779 (printed pages 1 - 3)
    8. 3.8 United States Copyright Office, "Federal Copyright Protection for Pre-1972 Sound Recordings: A Report of the Register of Copyrights," Executive Summary (December 2011)
    9. 3.9 In the Matter of: Federal Copyright Protection of Sound Recordings Fixed Before February 15, 1972, Docket No. 2010-4, Comments of Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and American Association of Independent Music (A2IM) (January 31, 2011) (.pdf), read pp. 22 - 31
    10. 3.10 Comments of EFF in Response to Notice of Inquiry: Federal Copyright Protection of Sound Recordings Fixed Before February 15, 1972 (January 31, 2011) (.pdf), read pp. 2 - 4; 10 - 17
    11. 3.11 Show/Hide More OPTIONAL (Spring 2013)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      1. 3.11.1 American University Center for Social Media, "Documentary Filmmakers’ Statement of Best Practices in Fair Use" (Issued: November 18, 2005) (.pdf)
      2. 3.11.2 GateHouse Media Massachusetts, I, Inc. v. New York Times Company Civil Action No. 08-12114-WGY (D. Mass. 2008), Expert Report of Douglas Gary Lichtman Professor of Law UCLA School of Law (January 19, 2009) (.pdf)
      3. 3.11.3 Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films, Case No. 02-6521 (6th Cir.), Brief of Amici Curiae Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law and the Electronic Frontier Foundation in Support of Appellee (January 20, 2005) (.pdf), read Argument Sec. II, pp. 12 - 17
      4. 3.11.4 United States Copyright Office, "Federal Copyright Protection for Pre-1972 Sound Recordings: A Report of the Register of Copyrights" (December 2011)
      5. 3.11.5 Council on Library and Information Resources and Library of Congress, Washington, DC, "Protection for Pre-1972 Sound Recordings under State Law and Its Impact on Use by Nonprofit Institutions: A 10-State Analysis," (September 2009) (.pdf)
      6. 3.11.6 Joshua Crum, "The Day the (Digital) Music Died: Bridgeport, Sampling Infringement, and a Proposed Middle Ground" 3 BYU Law Rev 943 (2008) (.pdf)
      7. 3.11.7 Olufunmilayo Arewa, "From J.C. Bach to Hip Hop: Musical Borrowing, Copyright and Cultural Context," Case Legal Studies Research Paper No. 04-21, 84 North Carolina Law Rev 547 (2006) (available at SSRN)
  4. 4 Show/Hide More INDUSTRY STRUCTURE AND LEGAL / BUSINESS ARRANGEMENTS (1 OF 2): Record Companies, Record Deals, and Master Use Licenses (Spring 2013)
    Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    TOPICS
    Traditional record deals (between artists and record companies).
    Overview of contract terms.
    Consideration of various record contract issues, including:
    - minors and contracts;
    - California’s “Seven-Year Statute”;
    - termination of copyright transfers;
    - controlled composition clauses; and
    - sale vs. license and digital exploitation.
    “360 Deals.”

    1. 4.1 M. William Krasilovsky and Sydney Shemel, with Contributions by John M. Gross and Jonathan Feinstein, This Business of Music, 10th Ed. , Billboard Books (2007), read Ch. 2, “Recording Artist Contracts," pp. 14 - 28
    2. 4.2 M. William Krasilovsky and Sydney Shemel, with Contributions by John M. Gross and Jonathan Feinstein, This Business of Music, 10th Ed. , Billboard Books (2007), read Ch. 3, “Contracts with Minors,” pp. 30 - 32
    3. 4.3 California Labor Code Section 2855
    4. 4.4 Statement of Marybeth Peters, The Register of Copyrights, before the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property Committee on the Judiciary United States House of Representatives, 106th Congress, 2nd Session (May 25, 2000)
    5. 4.5 Senate Judiciary Committee Report on the Digital Performance Right in Sound Recordings Act of 1995, to Accompany S. 227 (August 4, 1995), read "Section 115(c)(3)(E)," pp. 41 - 42 (.pdf)
    6. 4.6 Show/Hide More FBT Productions, LLC v. Aftermath Records, 621 F.3d 958 (9th Cir. 2010) (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    7. 4.7 Form / Template "360 Deal," focus on Pars. 10 - 14, skim remaining provisions
    8. 4.8 Show/Hide More ONLINE ONLY (Spring 2013)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      1. 4.8.1 Larry Rohter, "Record Industry Braces for Artists' Battles Over Song Rights," The New York Times (August 15, 2011)
      2. 4.8.2 Eric Boehlert, "Four Little Words," Salon.com (August 28, 2000)
      3. 4.8.3 Jeff Leeds, "The New Deal: Band as Brand," The New York Times (November 11, 2007)
      4. 4.8.4 Bob Lefsetz, "360 Deals," The Lefsetz Letter (November 11, 2007)
    9. 4.9 Show/Hide More OPTIONAL (Spring 2013)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      1. 4.9.1 "Major Label Contract Clause Critique," Future of Music Coalition (October 3, 2001)
      2. 4.9.2 Mary LaFrance, "Authorship and Termination Rights in Sound Recordings," 75 S. Cal. L. Rev. 375 (2002) (.pdf)
      3. 4.9.3 Peter S. Menell and David Nimmer, "Sound Recordings, Works for Hire, and the Termination-of-Transfers Time Bomb" (June 17, 2010) (available at SSRN)
      4. 4.9.4 "The Terminator: Rights Reversion and Musicians," Future of Music Coalition (April 21, 2010)
      5. 4.9.5 Bob Tarantino, "The Ninth Circuit’s Eminem License vs. Sale Decision," Entertainment & Media Law Signal (September 10, 2007)
      6. 4.9.6 Douglas Okorocha, "A Full 360: How the 360 Deal Challenges the Historical Resistance towards Establishing a Fiduciary Duty between Recording Artist and Record Label," UCLA Entertainment Law Review, Vol. 18, 2011 (November 11, 2010) (available at SSRN )
  5. 5 Show/Hide More INDUSTRY STRUCTURE AND LEGAL / BUSINESS ARRANGEMENTS (2 OF 2): Music Publishers, Publishing Agreements, Licenses, and PROs (Spring 2013)
    Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright

    TOPICS
    Contractual arrangements between songwriters and publishers.
    Licensing of musical compositions by publishers (mechanical and synchronization licenses).
    Public performance rights and musical compositions.
    Digital / new media issues faced by songwriters and the publishing industry.
    The role of the Harry Fox Agency in licensing of musical compositions.

    READINGS (BARGFREDE / MAK)
    Ch. 4, What is a ‘Copy’ and What is a ‘Performance?,’ pp. 53 – 57

    1. 5.1 Al Kohn and Bob Kohn, "Kohn on Music Licensing, 4th Ed." (Aspen Publishers 2010) , read pp. 103-138, 159-175; skim remaining pages (.pdf)
    2. 5.2 Anita Wadhwani, "Hitched to a Star," The Tennessean (January 2, 2011) (.pdf)
    3. 5.3 Statement of Rick Carnes, President The Songwriters Guild of America Before the Subcommittee on Courts, the Intern and Intellectual Property of the House Committee on the Judiciary, "The Section 115 Reform Act of 2006" (May 16, 2005) (.pdf)
    4. 5.4 Show/Hide More Recording Industry Ass'n v. Lib. of Congress, 608 F.3d 861 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    5. 5.5 United States Copyright Office, "Mechanical License Royalty Rates" (.pdf)
    6. 5.6 Show/Hide More US v. ASCAP (In re RealNetworks, Inc., Yahoo! Inc.), 627 F.3d 64 (2nd Cir. 2010) (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    7. 5.7 Show/Hide More ONLINE ONLY (Spring 2013)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      1. 5.7.1 Jacqui Cheng, "Judge: ringtones aren’t performances, so no royalties," Ars Technica (October 15, 2009)
      2. 5.7.2 Ed Christman, "Copyright Royalty Board Issues Decision," Billboard.biz (October 2, 2008)
      3. 5.7.3 Ben Sisario, "Disappointing Songwriters, Supreme Court Rejects Music Appeal," NY Times (October 4, 2011)
      4. 5.7.4 Ed Christman, "Universal Music Publishing Plots Exit from ASCAP, BMI," Billboard.biz (February 1, 2013)
    8. 5.8 Show/Hide More OPTIONAL (Spring 2013)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      1. 5.8.1 U.S. Copyright Office, Circular 73, "Compulsory License for Making and Distributing Phonorecords" (.pdf)
      2. 5.8.2 Harry Fox Agency, "What does HFA do?"
      3. 5.8.3 In Re: Mechanical and Digital Phonorecord Rate Adjustment Proceeding , Docket No. RF 2006-1, Delivery Rate Adjustment Proceeding, US Copyright Office (October 16, 2006) (.pdf)
      4. 5.8.4 Show/Hide More Live365, Inc. v. Copyright Royalty Board, 698 F. Supp. 2d 25 (D.D.C. 2010) (Excerpts)
        Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      5. 5.8.5 "Music Publishers to Join YouTube Suit," The New York Times (August 7, 2007)
      6. 5.8.6 ASCAP Writer Application and Membership Agreement (.pdf)
      7. 5.8.7 ASCAP's Survey and Distribution System: Rules & Policies (.pdf)
      8. 5.8.8 Evan Brown, "Downloading a song is not a performance under the Copyright Act," Internet Cases (September 29, 2010)
      9. 5.8.9 Show/Hide More US v. ASCAP (In re Cellco Partnership), 663 F.Supp.2d 363 (SDNY 2009) (Excerpts)
        Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      10. 5.8.10 Show/Hide More US v. ASCAP (In Re AT&T Wireless f/k/a Cingular Wireless), 599 F.Supp.2d 415 (SDNY 2009) (Excerpts)
        Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      11. 5.8.11 Whitney Broussard, "The Promise and Peril of Collective Licensing," 17 Journal of Intellectual Property Law 1 (2009) (.pdf)
  6. 6 Show/Hide More DIGITAL SALES AND DISTRIBUTION (1 OF 2): Streaming Media, Public Performance Rights in Sound Recordings, and Digital Audio Transmissions (Spring 2013)
    Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    TOPICS
    Overview of public performance rights in sound recordings and digital audio transmissions.
    Section 114 statutory / compulsory licenses.
    2007 CRB webcaster rates and 2009 CRB webcaster settlement.
    Terrestrial performance rights for recordings.
    The role of SoundExchange in collection and distribution of royalties.

    1. 6.1 Show/Hide More Intercollegiate Broadcast System v. Copyright Royalty Board, 571 F.3d 69 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    2. 6.2 MaryBeth Peters, Register of Copyrights, Statement before the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property, Committee on the Judiciary, re: Digital Performance Right in Sound Recordings Act of 1995 (H.R. 1506) (June 28, 1995)
    3. 6.3 Commerce Department, Letter to Hon. Patrick J. Leahy re: HR 848, Performance Rights Act (April 1, 2010)
    4. 6.4 Show/Hide More ONLINE ONLY (Spring 2013)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      1. 6.4.1 SoundExchange Licensing 101
      2. 6.4.2 Jonathan H. Adler, "D.C. Circuit Holds Copyright Royalty Board Unconstitutional," The Volokh Conspiracy (July 6, 2012)
      3. 6.4.3 Michael Huppe, "You Don’t Know Me, But I Owe You Money," Entertainment and Sports Lawyer, Vol. 28, No. 3 (Fall 2010) (.pdf), pp. 3 - 8
      4. 6.4.4 John Timmer, "Pandora lives! SoundExchange cuts deal on webcasting rates," Ars Technica (July 7, 2009)
      5. 6.4.5 National Association of Broadcasters, "The Performance Rights Act Puts Local Jobs at Risk"
      6. 6.4.6 Ben Sisario, "Sirius's Move to Bypass a Royalty Payment Clearinghouse Causes an Uproar," The New York Times (November 6, 2011)
      7. 6.4.7 National Association of Broadcasters, "The Performance Rights Act Puts Local Jobs at Risk"
    5. 6.5 Show/Hide More OPTIONAL (Spring 2013)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      1. 6.5.1 Edward (Ned) R. Hearn, "Digital Downloads and Streaming: Copyright and Distribution Issues"
      2. 6.5.2 Amy Miller, "SoundExchange GC Wants Internet Radio to Face the Music," Law.com Corporate Counsel (October 21, 2008)
      3. 6.5.3 R. Anthony Reese, "Copyright and Internet Music Transmissions: Existing Law, Major Controversies, Possible Solutions," 55 Univ. of Miami Law Rev. 237 (2001) (.pdf)
      4. 6.5.4 Brian R. Day, "The Super Brawl: The History and Future of the Sound Recording Performance Right," 16 Mich. Telecomm. Tech. L. Rev. 179 (2009) (.pdf)
      5. 6.5.5 In the Matter of Federal Copyright Protection of Sound Recordings Fixed Before February 15, 1972 , United States Copyright Office, Library of Congress, Docket No. 210-4, Comments of SoundExchange, Inc. (January 31, 2011) (.pdf)
      6. 6.5.6 Text of H.R. 848, 111th Congress (.pdf)
      7. 6.5.7 Text of S. 379, 111th Congress (.pdf)
  7. 7 Show/Hide More RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT (1 OF 2): Intermediaries and the DMCA Safe Harbor (Spring 2013)
    Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright

    TOPICS
    The role of intermediaries and secondary liability for infringement.
    The Digital Millennium Copyright Act safe harbor.
    Statutory damages.
    Striking a balance — promoting innovation and protecting creators’ and content owners’ rights.

    READINGS (BARGFREDE / MAK)
    Ch. 9, DMCA / Copyright Law Reform, pp. 95 – 102
    Sample DMCA Takedown Notice, p. 121
    App C, A&M v. Napster, 239 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2001) (Excerpted), pp. 137 – 146
    App D, MGM v. Grokster, 545 U.S. 913 (2005) (Excerpted), pp. 147 – 150

    1. 7.1 Show/Hide More Arista Records LLC v. Lime Group LLC, 715 F.Supp.2d 481 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    2. 7.2 Corynne McSherry, "Viacom v. Google: A Decision at Last, and It's Mostly Good (for the Internet and Innovation), EFF Deeplinks Blog (April 5, 2012) (CC-BY)
    3. 7.3 Show/Hide More ONLINE ONLY (Spring 2013)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      1. 7.3.1 Joseph Menn, All the Rave, Crown Business (2003) (Excerpt)
      2. 7.3.2 Darren Waters, "Napster: 10 years of change," BBC (June 8, 2009)
      3. 7.3.3 Geoff Taylor, "Napster -- 10 years of turmoil," BBC (June 26, 2009)
      4. 7.3.4 Pamela Samuelson and Ben Sheffner, Debate, "Unconstitutionally Excessive Statutory Damage Awards in Copyright Cases," 158 U.PA. L. Rev. Pennumbra 53 (2009) (.pdf), read Samuelson opening statement (pp. 54-57) and Sheffner Rebuttal (pp. 58-61)
    4. 7.4 Show/Hide More OPTIONAL (Spring 2013)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      1. 7.4.1 17 U.S.C. § 512 (.pdf), read §§ 512(c), (d), (f), and (g)
      2. 7.4.2 Show/Hide More Lenz v. Universal Music Corp. 572 F. Supp. 2d 1150 (N.D. Cal. 2008) (Excerpts)
        Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      3. 7.4.3 Show/Hide More Viacom Int'l v. YouTube, Civil Nos. 07-CV-2103 (LLS), 07-CV-3582 (LLS) (S.D.N.Y. June 23, 2010) (Excerpts)
        Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
  8. 8 Show/Hide More RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT (2 of 2): Individual Infringers, Other Industries, and New Legislative Efforts (Spring 2013)
    Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    TOPICS
    Online anti-piracy and rights enforcement efforts against individual infringers.
    Online rights enforcement in other industries (news media, book publishing).
    Legislative efforts to enhance rights enforcement mechanisms (SOPA, PIPA, etc.).

    1. 8.1 Show/Hide More Sony BMG Music Entertainment, et al. v. Tenenbaum, 660 F.3d 487 (1st Cir. 2011) (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    2. 8.2 Show/Hide More ONLINE ONLY (Spring 2013)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      1. 8.2.1 Nate Anderson, "Judge tells copyright troll Righthaven no, it's fair use," Ars Technica (October 21, 2010)
      2. 8.2.2 Jonathan Zittrain, Kendra Albert, and Alicia Solow-Niederman, "A Close Look at SOPA," The Future of the Internet Blog (December 2, 2011)
      3. 8.2.3 Cary Sherman, "What Wikipedia Won't Tell You," NY Times (February 7, 2012)
      4. 8.2.4 Mike Masnick, "RIAA Totally Out of Touch: Lashes Out At Google, Wikipedia And Everyone Who Protested SOPA/PIPA," TechDirt (February 8, 2012)
      5. 8.2.5 Cary Sherman, "Comments, Questions, Concerns: RIAA CEO Reflects On Responses To His New York Times Op-Ed," RIAA Blog (February 23, 2012)
      6. 8.2.6 Open Rights Group, "Neil Gaiman on Copyright, Piracy and the Commercial Value of the Web" (February 3, 2011)
    3. 8.3 Show/Hide More OPTIONAL (Spring 2013)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      READINGS (BARGFREDE / MAK)
      Ch. 8, Gaps in Copyright Law, pp. 87 – 94

      1. 8.3.1 Fred von Lohmann, "Making Available is Not Distribution, Says Court in London-Sire v. Doe," EFF Deeplinks Blog (April 2, 2008) (CC BY 3.0)
      2. 8.3.2 Elektra Entertainment Group, Inc. v. Barker, 551 F. Supp. 2d 234 (S.D.N.Y. 2008)
      3. 8.3.3 London-Sire Records, Inc. v. Doe 1 et al. , 542 F.Supp.2d 153 (D. Mass. 2008)
      4. 8.3.4 "Second Circuit Upholds Perpetual Anti-Bootlegging Protection Against Copyright Clause Challenge. — United States v. Martignon , 492 F.3d 140 (2d Cir. 2007)," 121 Harv. L. Rev. 1455 (2008) (.pdf)
  9. 9 Show/Hide More DIGITAL SALES AND DISTRIBUTION (2 OF 2): New Services and Emerging Models (Spring 2013)
    Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright

    TOPICS
    Evolving digital business models and distribution channels.
    Subscriptions, sales of digital downloads.
    Music in the “cloud” and “locker” services.
    Revenues and margins in digital distribution.
    The importance of data in the digital distribution world.

    READINGS (BARGFREDE / MAK)
    Ch. 5, Copyright Law and Ever-Changing Distribution Models, 59 – 62
    Ch. 6, Digital Distribution Channels and Mediums, pp. 65 – 70
    Ch. 7, Digital Music Delivery Formats, pp. 71 – 86
    Ch. 12, How to Start an Online Music Service, pp. 115-120

    1. 9.1 Show/Hide More UMG Recordings, Inc. v. MP3.Com, Inc., 92 F. Supp. 2d 349 (S.D.N.Y. 2000) (Excerpts)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    2. 9.2 Show/Hide More ONLINE ONLY (Spring 2013)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      1. 9.2.1 Ben Sisario, "Investors are Drawn Anew to Digital Music," The New York Times (February 28, 2011)
      2. 9.2.2 Austin Carr, "Spotify Exec Ken Parks On 'Windowing': Mind-Boggling, Very Bad, Hostile," Fast Company (February 28, 2012)
      3. 9.2.3 Dave Haynes, "Love, Music & APIs: Why the music industry should embrace developers," MidemBlog (September 21, 2010)
      4. 9.2.4 Internet Radio Fairness Coalition: What Industry Leaders Are Saying
      5. 9.2.5 "Major Music Industry Groups Reach Historic Agreement on Royalty Rates and Standards," Digital Media Association (April 11, 2012)
      6. 9.2.6 "IFPI Digital Music Report 2013: Engine of a Digital World" (February 26, 2013), read pp. 6 - 10; skim remaining pages
    3. 9.3 Show/Hide More OPTIONAL (Spring 2013)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      READINGS (BARGFREDE / MAK)
      Ch. 10, Web 2.0: How Virtual Worlds, Social Networking Sites, Advertisers, Bloggers, and Others Fit In, pp. 107 – 110

      1. 9.3.1 Eliot Van Buskirk, "Interview: The Analyst Who Claims Revenue from Music Downloads to Phones Will Increase 129 Percent," Evolver.fm (March 3, 2011)
      2. 9.3.2 Eliot Van Buskirk, "Free Music Can Pay as Well as Paid Music, Says YouTube," Evolver.fm (February 2, 2011)
      3. 9.3.3 Eliot Van Buskirk, "Estimate: U.S. Spotify Would Have 1,115,516 Subscribers, $127,168,824 in Annual Revenue," Evolver.fm (December 8, 2010)
      4. 9.3.4 Show/Hide More Cartoon Network LP, LLLP v. CSC Holdings, Inc., 536 F. 3d 121 (2nd Cir. 2008) (Excerpts)
        Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
  10. 10 Show/Hide More CHALLENGES TO THE PARADIGM: Law, Policy, and Business Transformations in the Digital Age (Spring 2013)
    Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
    TOPICS
    Alternative approaches to artists’ financing / releasing music.
    “Open” licenses (incl. Creative Commons).
    Proposed changes to the legal regime.
    Alternative compensation systems.

    1. 10.1 Lawrence Lessig, Free Culture, The Penguin Press (2004) (CC BY-NC 2.0), "Rebuilding Free Culture: One Idea," read pp. 282-286
    2. 10.2 Amanda Palmer, "The new RECORD, ART BOOK, and TOUR," Kickstarter (Funding Ended May 31, 2012)
    3. 10.3 Amanda Palmer, "The Art of Asking," TED2013 (February 2013)
    4. 10.4 Cord Jefferson, "Amanda Palmer's Million-Dollar Music Project and Kickstarter's Accountability Problem," Gawker (September 19, 2012)
    5. 10.5 William Fisher, Promises to Keep, Stanford University Press (2004), Chapter 6: "An Alternative Compensation System," (CC BY 3.0), read pp. 1 - 22
    6. 10.6 Show/Hide More ONLINE ONLY (Spring 2013)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      1. 10.6.1 Mike Masnick, "CBC Stops Using Creative Commons Music Over Concerns About Commercial vs. Non-Commercial Use," Techdirt (October 8, 2010)
      2. 10.6.2 Glenn Peoples, "Kickstarter Got A $10 Million Infusion -- Here's Why That's Important For The Music Business," Billboard.biz (March 18, 2011)
      3. 10.6.3 Ian S. Port, "Selling Albums for $1 Will Not Devalue the 'Art' of Music -- It Will Get More People Buying It," blogs.SFWeekly.com (October 19, 2010)
      4. 10.6.4 Ian Rogers, "Why Data is the Future of the Music Biz," Wired / YouTube (5:06)
      5. 10.6.5 Public Knowledge, “Internet Blueprint,” read Top Six Proposals
      6. 10.6.6 "Sci-Fi’s Cory Doctorow Separates Self-Publishing Fact from Fiction," NPR All Tech Considered (October 25, 2010) (4:24)
    7. 10.7 Show/Hide More OPTIONAL (Spring 2013)
      Original Creator: cbavitz Current Version: h2ocopyright
      1. 10.7.1 Creative Commons, "Defining 'Noncommercial': A Study of How the Online Population Understands “Noncommercial Use," "Executive Summary," pp. 10 - 13
      2. 10.7.2 Miguel Helft, "Judge Rejects Google's Deal to Digitize Books," The New York Times (March 22, 2011)
      3. 10.7.3 Jenna Wortham, "A Few Dollars at a Time, Patrons Support Artists on the Web," The New York Times (August 9, 2009)
      4. 10.7.4 "Sci-Fi’s Cory Doctorow Separates Self-Publishing Fact from Fiction," NPR All Tech Considered (October 25, 2010) (4:24)
Close

Playlist Information

January 14, 2014

Author Stats

h2ocopyright

Other Playlists by h2ocopyright

Find Items

Search below to find items, then drag and drop items onto playlists you own. To add items to nested playlists, you must first expand those playlists.

SEARCH
Leitura Garamond Futura Verdana Proxima Nova Dagny Web
small medium large extra-large