Tim Marman's Loosely Coupled

Browse by Tags

• Apple
• Audio
• Blogging
• Business
• DRM
• Entrepreneurship
• Facebook
• Gadgets
• Law School
• Microsoft
• Music
• NextNY
• Patent
• Personal
• Privacy
• Rants
• Social Behavior
• Startup
• Technology
• Things that amuse me
• Things that bother me
• Video
• Web 2.0

• Explaining copyright with a drawing

  While obviously a bit of an oversimplification, I think Erik’s drawing really does a great job of capturing the base dynamics of how copyright works ( via Dan ).   Basically, anything in the left circle requires permission; anything in the middle requires justification under the Fair Use test; and anything on the right is allowed by law. Posted Jun 10 2008, 08:33 AM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Intellectual Property, Copyright, Law

• Being better than free when copies are ubiquitous

  The digital world fundamentally changes what a copy means for copyright. I wrote about this in the past from the legal perspective, suggesting an implied license to reproduce and a greater reliance on other rights. Kevin Kelly has a great post up about the Internet's role as a super-distribution center and how to make money in the face of this ( via Andrew ). Yet the previous round of wealth in this economy was built on selling precious copies, so the free flow of free copies tends to undermine the established order. If reproductions of our best efforts are free, how can we keep going? To put it simply, how does one make money selling free copies? I have an answer. The simplest way I can put it is thus: When copies are super abundant, they become worthless. When copies are super abundant, stuff which can't be copied becomes scarce and valuable. When copies are free, you need to sell things which can not be copied. In other words, money is no longer in the distribution, but "rather... Posted Feb 22 2008, 10:15 AM by Tim with | with 1 comment(s) Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Copyright, Business, Law

• Scoble, Facebook and Data Ownership

  I've sort of ignored the whole Scoble/Facebook fiasco, with people arguing on both sides who "owns" the data. Jimmy Gutterman misses the point a bit , because Facebook has already opened up the social graph through the Facebook Platform API. What they don't expose - and why this script resorted to screen-scraping - is any contact information. He paints this as a "lock in" issue, but I doubt that's their primary goal. We already complain enough about the spam we get on Facebook, and I would hate it if someone in my network shared - accidentally or on purpose - that contact information with spammers. So, yeah, I think what Facebook did is a good thing, which seems to be the majority sentiment. Mike Arrington said Plaxo flubbed it and Jeff Jarvis agrees . Loren Feldman called Robert Scoble a corporate spy . Allen discussed how we should approach the data ownership problem . Dare says Facebook is right - since Scoble did not enter any of the contact information... Posted Jan 09 2008, 11:08 AM by Tim with | with 1 comment(s) Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Copyright, Privacy, Blogging, Law, Facebook

• Understanding the Cablevision DVR lawsuit

  While I agree with Mark Cuban that the lawsuit is a mistake , I thought it was worth discussing why - from a legal perspective - the network DVR is an issue. Copyright gives the owner a limited monopoly over a few aspects, most notably the ability to reproduce and distribute the work. In a "normal" DVR, there are two points where these rights come into play: a reproduction and distribution in the initial broadcast, and a reproduction when saving to the hard drive. (Under current case law, even taking a digital file and loading it into memory to play is technically a "reproduction", fixed for purposes of copyright). The former is obviously licensed by the copyright holder. What allows the latter is a concept known as fair use . (Remember, I said it was a limited monopoly). There are four factors to determining whether something qualifies as fair use: the purpose and character of the use the nature of the work the amount used the effect on the market for the work None of these factors are... Posted Apr 11 2007, 08:25 AM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Gadgets, Copyright, Video, Law

• Was DRM-free music an Apple innovation?

  Some people have tried to paint the recent announcement by Apple as example of Apple innovating and Microsoft following . Headlines like " Microsoft changes tune on selling DRM-free songs " are simply misleading - none of the technology companies truly wanted DRM, but they were a necessary evil in selling music that they did not own. As I've discussing in previous posts , Microsoft, Real Networks, and Yahoo! were all instrumental in the anti-DRM movement. Most labels seem to get it - these decisions and stratregy are more often coming from the corporate parents, not the labels themselves. In fact, Gates criticized DRM months before Jobs' manifesto a month ago, and EMI had been reportedly been considering releasing DRM-free tracks in MP3 format for awhile. This initially-exclusive deal with EMI simply demonstrates Apple's significant marketshare for purchased music and influence in the market. The mere fact that Apple was lucky and/or powerful enough to convince a major label to do something... Posted Apr 09 2007, 12:59 PM by Tim with | with 1 comment(s) Filed under: Intellectual Property, Rants, Things that bother me, Things that amuse me, Copyright, Microsoft, Apple, Law, Audio, DRM

• Students sue anti-cheating company

  Prof. Patry passes along an interesting story . Four students are suing a company that compares submitted papers to a database to test for plagiarism. The service seeks to root out cheaters by comparing student term papers and essays against a database of more than 22 million student papers as well as online sources and electronic archives of journals. In the process, the student papers are added to the database. The students are suing because that last piece - they claim (rightfully) that they own the copyright in their respective papers and the school submitted to this service despite explicitly being told not to do so. Turnitin and the school board have a tenuous Fair Use claim - as one commenter on Patry's blog points out, much of the analysis will probably focus on whether there is a market for high-school term papers. Of course, none of the Fair Use factors are dispositive, and it's possible the commercial use (this probably wouldn't be considered academic use in that sense) and the... Posted Apr 03 2007, 04:12 PM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Intellectual Property, Copyright, Law

• More on the Music Industry's Slow Death

  This letter from a former customer further illustrates how the music industry is alienating its customers. While I would like to say I responded with something witty, I must admit to being completely flummoxed. There I sat, a loyal music fan who has shelled out actual money to a business that is supposed to be having financial problems, and the best they can do is tell me to wander the streets of Seattle looking for different internet providers who might allow me to download the music that I have already paid for, music that I have spent the better part of three house trying to listen to, and which is still unusable?” As I said before, sometimes piracy isn't about getting it for free . Given the choice of paying for crippled digital music in two months or downloading free, unrestricted music today, is it really any surprise that they choose the latter? You have record companies paying major labels for airtime, but putting arguably their best promotional vehicle out of business by jacking... Posted Mar 22 2007, 07:48 AM by Tim with | with 1 comment(s) Filed under: Intellectual Property, Rants, Music, Copyright, Law, Audio, Social Behavior, DRM

• First Life is refused a C&D

  Marty's post reminded me about this great anti-C&D from Linden Labs. This notice is provided on behalf of Linden Research, Inc. (“Linden Lab”), the owner of trademark, copyright and other intellectual property rights in and to the “Second Life” product and service offering, including the “eye-in-hand” logo for Second Life and the website maintained at http://secondlife.com/. It has come to our attention that the website located at http://www.getafirstlife.com/ purports to appropriate certain trade dress and marks associated with Second Life and owned by Linden Lab. That website currently includes a link in the bottom right-hand corner for “Comments or cease and desist letters.” As you must be aware, the Copyright Act (Title 17, U.S. Code) contains provisions regarding the doctrine of “fair use” of copyrighted materials (Section 107 of the Act). Although lesser known and lesser recognized by trademark owners, the Lanham Act (Title 15, Chapter 22, U.S. Code) protecting trademarks is also... Posted Mar 01 2007, 10:57 AM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Intellectual Property, Things that amuse me, Copyright, Web 2.0, Law

• Steve Jobs and Apple telling half-truths about DRM

  This has already been covered ad nasuem , but I thought I should mention Apple's denouncement of DRM last week. Steve Jobs summarily dismissed Apple's DRM as a result of demands from the record labels. Since Apple does not own or control any music itself, it must license the rights to distribute music from others, primarily the “big four” music companies: Universal, Sony BMG, Warner and EMI. These four companies control the distribution of over 70% of the world’s music. When Apple approached these companies to license their music to distribute legally over the Internet, they were extremely cautious and required Apple to protect their music from being illegally copied. The solution was to create a DRM system, which envelopes each song purchased from the iTunes store in special and secret software so that it cannot be played on unauthorized devices. I have no doubt that the record labels are concerned with putting unprotected music out there, but Apple is also in no rush to do away with DRM... Posted Feb 13 2007, 04:20 AM by Tim with | with 2 comment(s) Filed under: Intellectual Property, Rants, Music, Copyright, Business, Apple, Law

• How is IP split between separating founders?

  AskTheVC addresses the question of what happens to IP rights when the founders go their separate ways . "Bottom line, you have a strong incentive (as does your former partner) to settle this amicably, otherwise, you both are going to be worse off." I thought it was worthwhile to dig into this a little further, though, and discuss what happens with the various IP rights a startup might acquire. Often you'll hear 3 founders say "we want everything split 3 ways", but joint ownership of IP can be tricky. Rights and duties with joint ownership are poorly misunderstood, even by many lawyers. More importantly, the rights and obligations of each owner vary by the type of intellectual property and from country to country. A joint owner of copyright in the US has different rights from a joint owner in England, and a joint owner of copyright has different rights from a joint owner of a patent. Both copyright and patent rights vest in the original author(s) or inventor(s) respectively, and both can... Posted Feb 12 2007, 06:47 PM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Intellectual Property, Copyright, Web 2.0, Patent, Business, Law, Entrepreneurship, Startup, NextNY