Hello:
I hope your life has been well! I have been busy busy busy. Last Saturday I gave a presentation on Trademarks and the importance of protecting them at the Inventor's Association of Georgia's monthly meeting. Despite technical difficulties with my MAC Ibook G4, the presentation went well. I gave examples of different types trademarks; discussed the difference between patents, trademarks, and copyrights; discussed cost effective solutions in defending and initiating trademark infringement actions; and gave advice on how to establish a cost effective trademark patrolling program.
Also I have been writing weekly for BlackWeb2.0. Last week, I wrote an article on privacy issues with Cloud Computing. Check it out and let me know what you think.
Until next time.
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Monday, August 17, 2009
Update: RIAA File-Sharing Litigation: Obama Administration Backs RIAA
Hello!
I am finally back! I have been traveling for the past few weeks giving presentations and writing articles.
Previously I wrote a post about the RIAA vs. Tenenbaum case. This case is one of several high profile file-sharing lawsuits currently being reviewed by the courts.
Another case that has garnered national attention is the RIAA vs. Thomas-Rasset. Ms. Thomas-Rasset purchased songs from I-tunes and shared them with peers. A Minnesota federal jury found her guilty of copyright infringement and the court ordered her to pay $80,000 for each of the 24 downloaded song she shared. Her jury verdict came to a whopping $1.92 million dollars. She is now seeking to vacate the judgment for being too excessive.
However, last week, the Obama Administration submitted arguments in favor of the jury verdict. The Justice Department argued that the jury verdict was not too excessive considering the nature of file sharing. So although Ms. Thomas-Rasset may have shared the files with only a select group of individuals, those individuals continued to share the files with other users and so on. So the file sharing continues.
Clearly, The Obama Administration is intellectual property ownership friendly and is asserting its position as such. The RIAA really needs this support from the Justice Department considering the negative publicity and backlash it has received for going after individual consumers. It will be interesting to see if the judge actually reduced the monetary award. I will keep you posted.
I welcome your thoughts.
I am finally back! I have been traveling for the past few weeks giving presentations and writing articles.
Previously I wrote a post about the RIAA vs. Tenenbaum case. This case is one of several high profile file-sharing lawsuits currently being reviewed by the courts.
Another case that has garnered national attention is the RIAA vs. Thomas-Rasset. Ms. Thomas-Rasset purchased songs from I-tunes and shared them with peers. A Minnesota federal jury found her guilty of copyright infringement and the court ordered her to pay $80,000 for each of the 24 downloaded song she shared. Her jury verdict came to a whopping $1.92 million dollars. She is now seeking to vacate the judgment for being too excessive.
However, last week, the Obama Administration submitted arguments in favor of the jury verdict. The Justice Department argued that the jury verdict was not too excessive considering the nature of file sharing. So although Ms. Thomas-Rasset may have shared the files with only a select group of individuals, those individuals continued to share the files with other users and so on. So the file sharing continues.
Clearly, The Obama Administration is intellectual property ownership friendly and is asserting its position as such. The RIAA really needs this support from the Justice Department considering the negative publicity and backlash it has received for going after individual consumers. It will be interesting to see if the judge actually reduced the monetary award. I will keep you posted.
I welcome your thoughts.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Twitter "Moldy Apartment" Libel Lawsuit
Hello Everyone!
I have been very busy traveling and speaking on protecting IP assets and legal issues in new media. This week I wrote an article on the Twitter "Moldy Apartment" lawsuit. If you have not heard, a Twitter user stated on Twitter that a management company had moldy apartments. The management company sued for libel and of course this story received massive attention. The issue here is whether the statement was factual or false. Read my take on this lawsuit here. If you like please join the discussion.
Have a great day!
I have been very busy traveling and speaking on protecting IP assets and legal issues in new media. This week I wrote an article on the Twitter "Moldy Apartment" lawsuit. If you have not heard, a Twitter user stated on Twitter that a management company had moldy apartments. The management company sued for libel and of course this story received massive attention. The issue here is whether the statement was factual or false. Read my take on this lawsuit here. If you like please join the discussion.
Have a great day!
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Are News Stories Copyrighted Material?
Hello!
This week I wrote an article on whether news is copyrighted material. Specifically, can the Associated Press claim copyright protection for factual information? The article is posted here. Please leave a comment!
This week I wrote an article on whether news is copyrighted material. Specifically, can the Associated Press claim copyright protection for factual information? The article is posted here. Please leave a comment!
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Copyright Office Forms
Hello:
This weekend I gave a presentation at the Synergy Club of Georgia on Protecting Business Intellectual Property Assets. The Synergy Club is an organization that provides much needed resources to women business owners. During the presentation I discussed the four main intellectual property assets a business can own: copyrights, trademarks, patents, and trade secrets.
The members of the club had great questions. I particularly received many questions regarding copyright registrations. One member asked a very good question concerning what is the appropriate copyright registration form to file for a sound recording. The copyright office has several paper forms for different types of works. They are as follows:
Form TX for literary works
Form VA for visual art works
Form PA for performing arts works (motion pictures, plays, dance performances, etc.)
Form SR for sound recordings, and
Form SE for single serials (periodicals, newspapers, magazines, newsletters, annuals, journals)
However, if a copyright registrant files their copyright application online using the Copyright's office eCO system using Form CO, a registrant can simply select any of the above categories as an option without filing separate and distinct applications.
Another advantage to filing the Form CO online is that the cost to file is $35 as opposed to $45 for paper applications.
As you can see, there are some advantages to using new technology...it is cheaper and more efficient!
I hope this information was helpful. I welcome your thoughts!
This weekend I gave a presentation at the Synergy Club of Georgia on Protecting Business Intellectual Property Assets. The Synergy Club is an organization that provides much needed resources to women business owners. During the presentation I discussed the four main intellectual property assets a business can own: copyrights, trademarks, patents, and trade secrets.
The members of the club had great questions. I particularly received many questions regarding copyright registrations. One member asked a very good question concerning what is the appropriate copyright registration form to file for a sound recording. The copyright office has several paper forms for different types of works. They are as follows:
Form TX for literary works
Form VA for visual art works
Form PA for performing arts works (motion pictures, plays, dance performances, etc.)
Form SR for sound recordings, and
Form SE for single serials (periodicals, newspapers, magazines, newsletters, annuals, journals)
However, if a copyright registrant files their copyright application online using the Copyright's office eCO system using Form CO, a registrant can simply select any of the above categories as an option without filing separate and distinct applications.
Another advantage to filing the Form CO online is that the cost to file is $35 as opposed to $45 for paper applications.
As you can see, there are some advantages to using new technology...it is cheaper and more efficient!
I hope this information was helpful. I welcome your thoughts!
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Internet Webcasters Get A Small Break!
Hello:
This week I wrote an article for Black Web 2.0 discussing the legal battle concerning royalty rates between internet radio stations and the Copyright Royalty Board. Click here to read the full article.
This week I wrote an article for Black Web 2.0 discussing the legal battle concerning royalty rates between internet radio stations and the Copyright Royalty Board. Click here to read the full article.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Does Your Website have a Privacy Policy?
Hello!
As web 2.0 continues to expand, online privacy is becoming a major focus point for individual consumers and regulators. Specifically, there is concern about how personal information of users and visitors of social networks and blogs is gathered and used by owners of these sites. There are several bodies of rules and regulations that address this very issue. They are the Federal Trade Commission's rules on behavioral advertising, Communications Decency Privacy Act, European Union Directive on Data Protection and various state privacy laws.
An owner of a website should have a very clear and direct privacy policy that states the following:
1. what type of personal information is collected
2. what type of technology is used to collect information
3. how the website will use the information collected
4. who will receive the personal information collected
5. specific measures in place to protect personal information
6. if the website will not use personal information
7. if the user voluntarily shares their personal information to the public, then their is no expectation of privacy,
8. how one can opt out of their personal information being gathered and/or shared with third parties.
Having a privacy policy can minimize liability for invasion of privacy claims and ensure a website owner is compliant with all federal and state privacy laws. A privacy policy also protects the reader or user of the website. The consumer is informed about how their information is used and can dictate to website owners whether they want their information shared or not.
Having a privacy policy is just good business sense.
I welcome your thoughts!
As web 2.0 continues to expand, online privacy is becoming a major focus point for individual consumers and regulators. Specifically, there is concern about how personal information of users and visitors of social networks and blogs is gathered and used by owners of these sites. There are several bodies of rules and regulations that address this very issue. They are the Federal Trade Commission's rules on behavioral advertising, Communications Decency Privacy Act, European Union Directive on Data Protection and various state privacy laws.
An owner of a website should have a very clear and direct privacy policy that states the following:
1. what type of personal information is collected
2. what type of technology is used to collect information
3. how the website will use the information collected
4. who will receive the personal information collected
5. specific measures in place to protect personal information
6. if the website will not use personal information
7. if the user voluntarily shares their personal information to the public, then their is no expectation of privacy,
8. how one can opt out of their personal information being gathered and/or shared with third parties.
Having a privacy policy can minimize liability for invasion of privacy claims and ensure a website owner is compliant with all federal and state privacy laws. A privacy policy also protects the reader or user of the website. The consumer is informed about how their information is used and can dictate to website owners whether they want their information shared or not.
Having a privacy policy is just good business sense.
I welcome your thoughts!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)