A federal appeals court ruled that Google can legally show thumbnail-sized versions of copyrighted images in its search results. In a case that may predict the course of the Google Book Search suits by authors and publishers, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals lifted an injunction against Google that stemmed from a copyright infringement suit filed by adult entertainment company Perfect 10.

Perfect 10 originally filed the suit against Google and Amazon.com in U.S. District Court, claiming the two violated its copyright by showing small versions of Perfect 10’s images in search engine results. But the 3-judge court said that Google’s use was transformative and constituted Fair Use.

On a second issue, the court remanded the case to the lower court to evaluate whether Google was a contributory infringer by not doing enough to avoid including links in its search results to sites where infringers had posted full-sized copies of Perfect 10’s images.

An appeal by either party would put the case, and many of Google’s practices, before the Supreme Court even before the Google Book Search suits are heard in lower courts.

Share This

When the Stanford University library recently announced the launch of a new Copyright Renewal Database, at least one prominent publication said it would help solve the thorny orphan works problem. If only it were so simple.

Stanford’s new database indicates whether a book published in the United States between 1923 and 1963 is still protected by copyright in the U.S. Books published between those dates needed to have been registered for copyright and to have had their registrations renewed. If they didn’t, they fell into the public domain. Earlier books are generally in the public domain already, while those published in 1964 and later were granted extended rights by Congress. Stanford’s is the first complete, online database of renewals received by the U.S. Copyright Office between 1950 and 1993. One issue for orphan works is that, for those books whose registration renewals extended their copyright terms, the database doesn’t necessarily identify the current rightsholder, who could be a descendent or a corporate successor to the original rightsholder.

“The database only tells you if the work was renewed,” says Mimi Calteri, executive assistant to Stanford’s head of libraries. “You still have the business of tracking down the copyright holder. It will tell you who renewed the copyright, and that could be a lead, but it doesn’t mean that the person who had the copyright hasn’t transferred it on.”

Calteri said Stanford is considering additional functionality to the database in the future to allow people who have copyright information about a particular book to add that information to the database records.

Share This

Almost from the day we completed the last redesign of copyright.com in 2004, we’ve been compiling a list of improvements, additions and features that would make the site even more useful. Many of those ideas came from you—through focus groups, customer meetings, usability studies and calls and emails.

The page you’re looking at right now reflects many of your suggestions. You asked us for more educational resources, more timely news and information about copyright and more flexible delivery options. You asked us to help you stay current on the issues and debates that are worthy of your attention. And you asked us to do it fairly and with candor.

The result is Copyright Central. It’s a place you can come to catch up on the latest copyright news, or to find out what blogs are catching people’s attention. Our resource section contains online tutorials and other tools to help answer your questions. You’ll find reports and reprints of articles as well as links to additional resources on the Web. In the © News section below, we’ll post headlines and links to timely articles that we think you’ll find interesting and useful. We hope you’ll bookmark this page and check in from time to time.

Perhaps the biggest change in Copyright Central is the introduction of our own blog, On Copyright, which replaces our traditional newsletter program. In a survey of newsletter subscribers late last year our readers said they wanted to learn about copyright-related news as it happened—without regard to a fixed publication schedule. In addition to that immediacy, they asked us to deliver the information in smaller bites, with links to other coverage or original sources. In short, they asked us for a blog.

As with any blog, On Copyright will evolve over time as it matures and finds its voice. Getting it right takes a little time, and we’ll try not to overwhelm you with new postings. To make it even easier, you’ll be able to choose between email and RSS delivery.

Though we’ll be posting items starting this week, On Copyright officially will go live with full functionality in a few weeks. When it does, we will notify our current newsletter subscribers by email. To subscribe now for email delivery, go to On Copyright and select “Email sign-up”. When we launch, you can switch to an RSS feed if you prefer that format.

We hope you’ll like what we’ve done with Copyright Central and the rest of the site. We’d love to hear if you do—or even if you think we missed the mark. Your feedback and suggestions will continue to shape the development and evolution of the entire site. Just email us at sitesuggestions@copyright.com.

Thanks for checking in, and we hope you’ll visit often.

Share This

More than 60% of college deans and administrators see their campuses’ risk of copyright infringement rising as electronic course materials grow in popularity. And electronic content use is going up. In fact, about two thirds of librarians believe electronic reserves are becoming a substitute for coursepacks. Those were some of the findings of Copyright Clearance Center’s (CCC) Academic Information Consumption Study based on a 2006 survey conducted by independent research company TideWatch. Survey participants included college and university faculty, students, senior administrators, librarians, IT managers and staff from campus copy shops and bookstores.

About one third of senior administrators reported that they require faculty and staff to secure copyright permissions on their own. Yet 59% of administrators do not include provisions for copyright fees and licenses within departmental budgets.

To see more details from our recent study, download the free “Content Use on Campus” research report.

Share This

Congress is back in session, and its membership looks significantly different than it did just one month ago. But the copyright issues it addresses may seem very familiar.

Orphan works and open access bills generated tremendous attention from colleges and rightsholders in 2006, but legislators failed to vote on either bill before their session ended. Now that membership has shifted from a Republican to a Democratic majority, the question is: will the new 110^th Congress address similar bills in 2007?

Miriam Nisbet, legal counsel for the American Library Association (ALA) says she expects these bills will resurface in Congress. “Copyright is not really a partisan issue.”

Senator Joseph Lieberman, the new chairman of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, may play a pivotal role in keeping his open access bill alive. He and Senator John Cornyn co-sponsored the Federal Research Public Access Act of 2006, which never made it to a vote by the previous Congress. The original bill, if passed, would have required researchers funded by federal agencies with research budgets of $100 million or more, to post their manuscripts for free public access.

“I think we’re going to see Senators Cornyn and Lieberman reintroduce their bill on open access in the next couple of months,” said Nisbet. ”And I think we’re going to see an introduction on the House side as well.”

The former Orphan Works Act may also resurface soon. The original bill, which attempted to reduce the risk of using copyrighted material when rightsholders cannot be found, drew criticism from photographers and graphic artists concerned that it would not adequately protect their copyrights.

Allan Adler, the Association of American Publishers (AAP) vice president for Legal & Government Affairs, said that he expects the new Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, Senator Patrick Leahy, an avid photographer, to take a strong interest in this legislation.

According to Adler and Nisbet, the new Congress may also take up other familiar copyright topics, such as an amendment to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to allow for fair use exceptions, and legislation that would tackle the issue of sovereign immunity.

As a result of a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 1999, state entities, such as universities, cannot be sued for damages if they violate someone’s copyright or patent rights unless the state agrees to waive sovereign immunity. Those same entities can, however, pursue damages for the violation of their own IP rights. Adler says the ranking minority member of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Lamar Smith, has expressed support in the past for legislation that would “re-level the playing field.”

Share This

Colleges and universities often ask for advice on how to use copyrighted audio and visual material lawfully. Fritz Dolak, manager of the Copyright Center at Ball State University and noted copyright speaker, offers these helpful tips:

1. Check the content. Use a legal copy of an audio/visual (AV) program for face-to-face teaching. The AV content must be used to meet instructional objectives and/or learning outcomes.

2. Manage portion size. When using AV content in distance education, use “reasonable and limited portions” of that material in accordance with the Technology, Education and Copyright Harmonization (TEACH) Act. Restrict access to the class on a secure server via username and password.

3. Refer to CONFU Multimedia Guidelines. Use the Conference on Fair Use Multimedia Guidelines for classroom enhancement materials. Restrict access to just your class on a secure server via username and password. These Guidelines are not part of copyright law but do allow the use of limited amounts of copyrighted materials.

4. Secure licensing for public use. Obtain licensing when using AV material for public performances.

5. Refrain from copying. Do not make copies of any AV program for distribution or a performance unless the program is in the public domain or you’ve obtained a license or permission to make copies.

Share This

Your company is based in the United States with personnel in other countries. All operate under different local copyright laws, yet they all need the same thing—information. Sound familiar?

International copyright is one of the most popular topics raised by our readers, and with good reason. Raising copyright awareness and securing rights for employees across the globe can seem daunting. But copyright experts Lolly Gasaway and Lesley Ellen Harris say there are steps companies can take to tackle the issue head-on.

The basic premise behind how copyright affects the global workforce is straightforward. “Apply the law of the country where the content is being used,” said Harris.

Almost every country has its own copyright laws. While most of those laws are fairly consistent from one country to the next, there are some differences, such as the duration of copyrights, and the extent of exceptions for private use in some countries, fair use in the United States and fair dealing in the United Kingdom, Canada and other countries.

Harris, a copyright lawyer and author, and Gasaway, associate dean for academic affairs and professor of law at the University of North Carolina School of Law, suggest global organizations start addressing international copyright issues by including information in their copyright policies.

In addition, they recommend companies designate an individual who can gather employee questions on the subject and meet with corporate counsel periodically to get answers. Employers can then cover those topics in future educational materials for personnel.

To educate employees in multiple locations, consider e-mail and online presentations, and remember that less is more, said Harris. “I truly believe in keeping it light,” she said. “People are overwhelmed with copyright. They’re scared of it. So give little pieces of information here and there and any practical advice that makes it easier for those that use content.”

Both experts suggested companies make copyright education more interesting by tackling the subject from different angles specific to their organizations, inviting outside presenters to deliver online seminars for employees, and posting FAQs and other information on their intranet sites.

“You’ve got to keep reminding people,” said Gasaway.

Gasaway also recommends that companies consider using a system to organize the copyright licenses they’ve secured on behalf of employees. “Use some sort of database where individuals can easily determine whether there is a licensing agreement and what it permits.”

Share This

Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) customers often tell us about effective steps they’ve taken to educate their employees about copyright. Here are just some of those helpful tips.

1. Add copyright to employee training. Start new employees on the right track by incorporating information about your compliance policy, guidelines and licensing coverage right into your training materials.

2. Lunch and learn. Host an educational lunch for employees and invite your corporate attorney to present an overview on copyright and any licensing systems you’ve set up to allow them to copy and distribute published content lawfully.

3. Train administrative staff. Often administrative employees are asked to photocopy and distribute information or forward content via e-mail. Help them help others by teaching them about what your licensing coverage allows them to do, and how to secure additional rights when needed.

4. Link to title search. If you have an annual license from CCC, your employees may need to search our catalog to check for coverage of a particular journal, newspaper or other work. Make it easy for them to do so by posting a link from your intranet site or by sending them to our title search page.

5. Enroll in free online seminars. If you need help training employees on the right ways to use and share copyrighted content, we can help. Encourage managers to participate in one of CCC’s free online seminars. To request notice of future trainings, contact us.

Share This

The Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA) has targeted a market research firm for allegedly copying and distributing copyrighted content from 130 magazines, newspapers, research reports and other publications without rightsholder consent. Negotiations between the two parties are ongoing in an effort to avoid litigation.

“This organization was copying massive amounts of content for which they should have received licensing, and distributed it in various ways to various people,” said Keith Kupferschmid, SIIA vice president, Intellectual Property Policy & Protection. “More specifically, they were making copies of the content in hard copy and also electronically, and distributing it by e-mail, and posting it on their intranet and internet sites.”

The case involves a 350-employee California market research company with offices throughout the United States and revenues of $30 million. Although a settlement has not yet been reached, Kupferschmid said the company “has been very cooperative.”

This infringement case is part of SIIA’s new Corporate Content Anti-Piracy Program (CCAP) that was developed at the request of SIIA’s members. The trade association serves more than 800 software and publishing companies. The CCAP includes copyright education courses and enforcement initiatives to curtail businesses from using and sharing published material illegally.

“We’re trying to educate companies so that they can understand exactly what they need to do to manage their content and not run the risk of infringement liability,” said Kupferschmid. “Those companies that don’t do that, and have practices of systematic and continuous copyright infringement, are going to find themselves at the other end of an SIIA lawsuit, with SIIA representing the publishers we have as members.”

Beginning January 1st, SIIA plans to offer rewards of up to $1 million for people who report content piracy cases that the association is able to pursue and secure either settlements or damage amounts. Kupferschmid says SIIA is investigating at least one other company for copyright infringement.

Share This

A newly released independent review of UK copyright law suggests that legislators reform intellectual property law to bring it into the digital age. Andrew Gowers, former editor of The Financial Times, led the government-commissioned study.

“I do not think the system is in need of radical overhaul,” Gowers states in the Gowers Review of Intellectual Property, which was released December 6th. “However, taking a holistic view of the system, I believe there is scope for reform to serve better the interests of consumers and industry alike.”

Among the report’s recommendations, Gowers suggests:

• Educational provisions for use of content in distance learning
• An “orphan works” provision to allow the use of content when no rightsholder is found
• Exceptions for “private copying” of all types of content for research purposes and to allow consumers to shift purchased content across different formats, such as transferring music from a CD to an mp3 player
• Exceptions for libraries to copy archive materials and to change the format of those copies to sustain archive records

The independent review also called for stronger penalties for online piracy, reduced litigation costs through mediation and other measures, and maintaining the existing 50-year term limit for copyrights on sound recordings.

England is one of several countries that have decided to take a second look at their IP laws, with a particular focus on how they address digital content use. Australia, for example, is now close to passing The Copyright Amendment Bill 2006. Much like Gower’s recommendation to allow format-shifting of purchased content by consumers, Australia’s legislation would also permit that type of personal use.

Share This