DOCSLIB.ORG

XPP-PDF Support Utility

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
XPP-PDF Support Utility BNA’s Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal® VOL. 88, NO. 2168 PAGES 509–574 JUNE 20, 2014 HIGHLIGHTS BNA INSIGHTS Mere Implementation of Abstract Idea With Computer Not Patent-Eligible COPYRIGHT: The author says the A method, a computer system, and a computer-readable medium to carry out Supreme Court’s final judgment a method for ensuring that a party to a contract has sufficient funds in its ac- in the Aereo case could clarify count are drawn to a patent-ineligible abstract idea, the U.S. Supreme Court or further muddy the nation’s holds. Affirming a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, copyright laws in a manner not the high court echoes a 2010 ruling that killed a patent on a computer algo- seen since the days of the player rithm for hedging investment risks. Alice Corp. Pty Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l. piano. Page 565 Page 513 ALSO IN THE NEWS TTAB Again Finds ‘Redskins’ Disparaging, Orders Registrations Cancelled The various trademark registrations used by the Washington Redskins ‘‘must be cancelled because they were disparaging to Native Americans at the re- COPYRIGHTS: Technology is spective times they were registered, in violation of Section 2(a) of the Trade- changing distribution channels mark Act of 1946,’’ the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board holds in a split de- and business models of view- cision. The board’s ruling strips away the team’s ability to rely on certain fed- ing content and recent court eral laws to enforce its trademark rights, which, if the registrations are decisions are creating uncertain- cancelled, will subsequently have to be grounded in common law. Blackhorse ties about intellectual property v. Pro-Football, Inc. Page 516 rights, according to participants at a Stanford University Law School conference. Page 522 7th Cir.: Characters From First Sherlock Holmes Stories Are Public Domain The fact that a few of the original Sherlock Holmes stories are still under the protection of copyright law does not prevent an author from using material TRADE DRESS: Snack bar com- from the stories that have fallen into the public domain without the authoriza- pany Kind failed to establish a tion of the copyright holder, the Seventh Circuit rules. The court rejects the likelihood of success on the mer- copyright holder’s attempt to distinguish ‘‘simple’’ or ‘‘flat’’ characters from its of its claim that Clif Mojo ‘‘complex’’ or ‘‘round’’ characters, which do not fall into the public domain un- bars infringed Kind’s trade til all the original works featuring them are in the public domain. Klinger v. dress, the Southern District of Conan Doyle Estate, Ltd. Page 517 New York rules. Kind LLC v. Clif Bar & Co. Page 531 Patent Community Saddened, But Not Surprised, By Rader’s Retirement COPYRIGHTS: Judge Randall R. Rader’s last day on the bench will be June 30, according to An online publish- an announcement by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Rader, ing platform cannot claim therefore, will retire exactly one month after resigning as chief judge—a move DMCA copyright immunity over that was precipitated by admissions of impropriety going to Rader’s off-the- images published on its website record emails to an attorney who had argued before the court. ‘‘The bottom before it designated a DMCA- line is that I was not happy after leaving the Chief position and it hit me that I related agent with the U.S. need to leave while I am young and full of energy to change the world,’’ Rader Copyright Office, the Northern said. Page 529 District of California holds. Oppenheimer v. Allvoices, Inc. Page 521 COPYRIGHT ஽ 2014 BY THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS, INC. ISSN 0148-7965 510 (Vol. 88, No. 2168) A PATENT, TRADEMARK & COPYRIGHT JOURNAL THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS, INC. 1801 S. BELL STREET, ARLINGTON, VA 22202-4501 (703) 341-3000 Paul N. Wojcik Gregory C. McCaffery Michael Eisenstein Scott Falk CHAIRMAN CEO AND PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT AND EXECUTIVE EDITOR GROUP PUBLISHER Naresh Sritharan ([email protected]), MANAGING EDITOR Anandashankar Mazumdar ([email protected]), Tony Dutra ([email protected]), Tamlin H. Bason ([email protected]), Blake Brittain ([email protected]), LEGAL EDITORS Garrett LeCron, INDEX EDITOR ADVISORY BOARD Stanley L. Amberg Laura Goldbard George Nancy J. Linck Michael J. Remington Chappaqua, N.Y. Stroock & Stroock & Lavan Rothwell, Figg, Ernst Drinker Biddle & Reath New York & Manbeck Washington, D.C. Washington, D.C. Robert A. Armitage Jeffrey M. Samuels Marco Island, Fla. Kenneth B. Germain University of Akron Wood Herron & Evans Judge Paul R. Michel (Ret.) Intellectual Property Owners School of Law Erika Arner Cincinnati Akron, Ohio Finnegan, Henderson, Education Foundation Washington, D.C. Farabow, Garrett & Dunner Charles L. Gholz Joshua Sarnoff Reston, Va. Oblon, Spivak, McClelland DePaul University Maier & Neustadt Lateef Mtima Chicago Courtenay C. Brinckerhoff Alexandria, Va. Howard University Foley & Lardner School of Law Roger E. Schechter Washington, D.C. Washington, D.C. George Washington Morton David Goldberg University Law School Patrick G. Burns Cowan, Liebowitz & Latman Washington, D.C. New York Carol B. Oberdorfer Greer, Burns & Crain Dickerson, Md. Neil A. Smith Chicago Hayden Gregory San Francisco, Calif. Ralph Oman Washington, D.C. Scott Allen Chambers George Washington John R. Thomas Squire Patton Boggs University Law School Georgetown University Washington, D.C. Steven M. Haines Washington, D.C. Law Center Seagate Technology Washington, D.C. Alan S. Cooper Cupertino, Calif. Marybeth Peters Albert Tramposch Wiley Rein Oblon, Spivak, McClelland American Intellectual Washington, D.C. Dale H. Hoscheit Maier & Neustadt Property Law Association Banner & Witcoff Alexandria, Va. Arlington, Va. James D. Crowne Washington, D.C. American Intellectual Marvin Petry James H. Wallace Jr. Property Law Association Bruce Joseph Stites & Harbison Wiley Rein Arlington, Va. Wiley Rein Alexandria, Va. Washington, D.C. Washington, D.C. Herbert C. Wamsley Q. Todd Dickinson Carey R. Ramos American Intellectual Intellectual Property Owners Siegrun D. Kane Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Association Property Law Association & Sullivan Arlington, Va. Kane Advisors Washington, D.C. Briarcliff Manor, N.Y. New York William K. West Donald R. Dunner Teresa Stanek Rea Pillsbury Winthrop Finnegan, Henderson, Henry W. Leeds Crowell & Moring Shaw Pittman Farabow, Garrett & Dunner North Falmouth, Mass. Washington, D.C. Washington, D.C. Washington, D.C. Stanley H. Lieberstein John F. Witherspoon Barbara A. Fiacco Westport Intellectual Jonathan D. Reichman Law Office of John Foley Hoag Property Center Kenyon & Kenyon Witherspoon Boston Westport, Conn. New York Washington, D.C The Advisory Board meets periodically, in Arlington, VA, to discuss important current issues involving subjects within the scope of BNA’s Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal. The function of the Board is to give the Journal’s editors the benefit of the members’ experienced judgment in evaluating the import of current patent, trademark and copyright developments and their possible impact upon the legal and business communities. Editorial statements and analyses will not be attributed to the Advisory Board or to any individual member or members. For Customer Service call 800-372-1033; Fax 800-253-0332. Correspondence regarding editorial content should be forwarded to: Managing Editor, BNA’s Pat- ent, Trademark & Copyright Journal, The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., 1801 S Bell St, Arlington, VA 22202-4501. Telephone (703) 341-3884, or e-mail [email protected] Copyright policy: Authorization to photocopy selected pages for internal or personal use is granted provided that appropriate fees are paid to Copyright Clear- ance Center (978) 750-8400, http://www.copyright.com. Or send written requests to BNA Permissions Manager: fax (703) 341-1636 or [email protected] (email). For more information, see http://www.bna.com/corp/copyright or call (703) 341-3316. BNA’s PATENT, TRADEMARK, & COPYRIGHT JOURNAL (ISSN 0148-7965) is published weekly, except for the week of July 4th, Labor Day week and the last week in December, at the annual subscription rate of $2,753 per year, for a single print copy, by The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA 22202-4501. Periodicals Postage Paid at Arlington, VA and at additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address change to BNA’s Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal, BNA Customer Contact Center, 3 Bethesda Metro Ctr, Suite 250, Bethesda, MD 20814. 6-20-14 COPYRIGHT ஽ 2014 BY THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS, INC. PTCJ ISSN 0148-7965 (Vol. 88, No. 2168) 511 In This Issue News / Page 513 Calendar / Page 570 BNA Insights / Page 565 INTERNATIONAL TRADE U.S. calls for end to WTO ATTORNEYS moratorium covering non-violation TRIPS disputes .... 525 Vilsack holds ‘‘frank discussions’’ with EU LEGAL MOVES Personnel changes at IP law firms, ministers; geographical indication a focus ................ 527 organizations ....................................................... 533 Vilsack says U.S., EU must find ‘‘sweet spot’’ to overcome differences on GIs in TTIP talks ............... 526 BNA INSIGHTS PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE COPYRIGHTS ‘‘New Technologies Are Once Again Blurring the Lines of Copyright Law,’’ by Francisco FEDERAL REGISTER Recent notices of the Patent and R. Montero .......................................................... 565 Trademark Office ................................................. 532 CONFERENCES PATENTS COPYRIGHTS Panelists: new technologies,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Notice of Use of Sound Recordings Under Statutory License
    Notice of Use of Sound Recordings 5 under Statutory License United States Copyright Office In accordance with 37 CFR 370.2, the transmission service named below hereby files with the Library of Congress, United States Copyright Office, a notice stating the service’s intention to use the statutory license under sections 112(e) or 114(d)(2), or both, of title 17 of the United States Code, as amended by Public Law 104-39, 109 Stat. 336, and Public Law 105-304, 112 Stat. 2860. Please enclose a check or money order for the nonrefundable filing fee of $40.00, payable to Register of Copyrights. Mail to: Check, if applicable: Copyright Royalty Board Amended filing ATTN: Licensing Division PO Box 70977 Washington, DC 20024-0977 Please type or print the requested information for each item. If this is an amended filing, please indicate which item contains new information by checking the “New Information” box to the left of that item. New Information 1 Name of service 2 Mailing address NOTE: A post office box is acceptable if it is the only address that can be used in that geographic location. 3 Telephone no. 4 Fax no. 5 Website address of service http:// NOTE: Information must be provided on how to gain access to the online website or home page of the service, or where information may be posted under the regulations concerning the use of sound recordings. 6 Nature of license and category of service: (Check all that apply) a Statutory license for digital transmissions, 17 USC §114(d)(2) Preexisting subscription service Eligible nonsubscription transmission
    [Show full text]
  • The Music Modernization Act of 2018 and Its Burgeoning Impact Jeffrey G
    The Music Modernization Act of 2018 and its Burgeoning Impact Jeffrey G. Knowles, Partner, Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass LLP Lisa M. Schreihart, Attorney Abstract The Music Modernization Act of 2018 (“MMA”), enacted October 11, 2018, is the most significant reform of music copyright law in decades. As the first major legislation since the Copyright Act of 1976 to affect music royalties, the MMA has made major strides in improving compensation and to level the playing field for all music creators, including songwriters, legacy artists, and music producers. The MMA modernizes the musical works licensing scheme for today’s digital music environment, provides federal copyright protection for pre-1972 sound recordings, and ensures that music producers can get a piece of the royalty pie. The MMA may also have some shortcomings that allow room for legislative growth in the modern music era. This paper describes the key parts of the MMA and eXamines the benefits and criticisms of the Act that have surfaced in the Act’s first year as law. An Overview of the Music Modernization Act The Music Modernization Act (MMA), proposed as H.R. 1551 by Representatives Orrin G. Hatch and Bob Goodlatte, combined the Music Modernization Act of 2018 (S. 2334), the Classics Protection and Access Act (S. 2393), and the Allocation for Music Producers Act (S. 2625). The MMA, an amended version of S. 2823, passed unanimously both in the House as H.R. 5447 on April 25, 2018 and in the Senate on September 18, 2018. The MMA was enacted October 11, 2018. The MMA is intended to: 1) increase compensation to songwriters and streamline licensing of their music; 2) enable artists who recorded music before 1972 to be paid royalties when their music is played on digital services; and 3) enable music producers (e.g., record producers, sound engineers, and other studio professionals) to receive royalties for their creative contributions to recorded music.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft of 7/26/2019 RECONCEPTUALIZING
    Draft of 7/26/2019 RECONCEPTUALIZING COMPULSORY COPYRIGHT LICENSES 72 Stanford Law Review (Forthcoming 2020) Jacob Victor* ABSTRACT United States copyright law generally assumes that by providing property entitlements in creative works, the free market will balance between two competing priorities: incentivizing creators to produce works and ensuring the public has adequate access to this content. But the Copyright Act also outlines several detailed compulsory licensing schemes requiring the owners of certain copyright interests, musical works in particular, to license to anyone at government-set prices. Consistent with broader property theory concepts, scholars tend to treat compulsory copyright licenses as liability rules used only to address market failures caused by transaction costs. This Article questions that account, arguing that compulsory licensing also plays an important and underexplored role in furthering copyright’s specific policy agenda. A close analysis of the music regulatory regime and its history shows that its primary function has been to recalibrate the balance between creators’ financial incentives and public access to expressive works in situations where free market licensing would yield problematic outcomes. Unlike liability rules designed only to address transaction costs, for which regulators generally try to mimic market rates using market proxies, the compulsory music licensing regime traditionally used copyright policy- oriented rate-setting criteria. Applying these criteria, regulators often chose below-market
    [Show full text]
  • Consolidated Financial Statements for the Financial Year from 1 January to 31 December 2018 Page
    Consolidated Financial Statements for the Financial Year from 1 January to 31 December 2018 gamigo AG Behringstrasse 16b 22765 Hamburg/Germany Content Consolidated Financial Statements for the Financial Year from 1 January to 31 December 2018 Page Consolidated management report of gamigo AG for the Financial Year from 1 January to 31 December 2018 1-39 Consolidated Statement of Financial Position as at 31 December 2018 40-41 Consolidated Statement of Profit and Loss and Comprehensive Income for the Financial Year from 1 January to 31 December 2018 42 Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity from 1 January to 31 December 2018 43 Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows from 1 January to 31 December 2018 44 Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of gamigo AG for the Financial Year from 1 January to 31 December 2018 45-126 Independent Auditor’s Report gamigo group Consolidated management report 2018 Consolidated management report of the gamigo group for the year ended 31 December 2018 I. Fundamentals of the gamigo group ...................................................................................... 2 A. Business operations and corporate structure ..................................................................................... 2 B. Business activities and organisation .................................................................................................. 3 C. Objectives and strategies .................................................................................................................. 7 D. Management
    [Show full text]
  • The Video Game Industry an Industry Analysis, from a VC Perspective
    The Video Game Industry An Industry Analysis, from a VC Perspective Nik Shah T’05 MBA Fellows Project March 11, 2005 Hanover, NH The Video Game Industry An Industry Analysis, from a VC Perspective Authors: Nik Shah • The video game industry is poised for significant growth, but [email protected] many sectors have already matured. Video games are a large and Tuck Class of 2005 growing market. However, within it, there are only selected portions that contain venture capital investment opportunities. Our analysis Charles Haigh [email protected] highlights these sectors, which are interesting for reasons including Tuck Class of 2005 significant technological change, high growth rates, new product development and lack of a clear market leader. • The opportunity lies in non-core products and services. We believe that the core hardware and game software markets are fairly mature and require intensive capital investment and strong technology knowledge for success. The best markets for investment are those that provide valuable new products and services to game developers, publishers and gamers themselves. These are the areas that will build out the industry as it undergoes significant growth. A Quick Snapshot of Our Identified Areas of Interest • Online Games and Platforms. Few online games have historically been venture funded and most are subject to the same “hit or miss” market adoption as console games, but as this segment grows, an opportunity for leading technology publishers and platforms will emerge. New developers will use these technologies to enable the faster and cheaper production of online games. The developers of new online games also present an opportunity as new methods of gameplay and game genres are explored.
    [Show full text]
  • Determination of Rates and Terms: Docket 2005-1 CRB DTRA
    UNITED STATES COPYRIGHT ROYALTY JUDGES ____________________________________ In the Matter of ) ) DIGITAL PERFORMANCE RIGHT ) Docket No. 2005-1 CRB DTRA IN SOUND RECORDINGS AND ) EPHEMERAL RECORDINGS ) ____________________________________) DETERMINATION OF RATES AND TERMS I. INTRODUCTION A. SUBJECT OF THE PROCEEDING This is a rate determination proceeding convened under 17 U.S.C. 803(b) et seq. and 37 CFR 351 et seq., in accord with the Copyright Royalty Judges’ Notice announcing commencement of proceeding, with a request for Petitions to Participate in a proceeding to determine the rates and terms for a digital public performance of sound recordings by means of an eligible nonsubscription transmission or a transmission made by a new subscription service under section 114 of the Copyright Act, as amended by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”), and for the making of ephemeral copies in furtherance of these digital public performances under section 112, as created by the DMCA, published at 70 FR 7970 (February 16, 2005). The rates and terms set in this proceeding apply to the period of January 1, 2006 through December 31, 2010. 17 U.S.C. 804(b)(3)(A). B. PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING The parties to this proceeding are: (i) Digital Media Association and certain of its member companies that participated in this proceeding, namely: America Online, Inc. (“AOL”), Yahoo!, Inc. (Yahoo!”), Microsoft, Inc. (“Microsoft”), and Live365, Inc. (“Live 365”) (collectively referred to as “DiMA”); (ii) “Radio Broadcasters”(this designation was adopted by the parties): namely, Bonneville International Corp., Clear Channel Communications, Inc., National Religious Broadcasters Music License Committee (“NRBMLC”), Susquehanna Radio Corp.; (iii) SBR Creative Media, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Programs to Download Games for Pc
    Programs to download games for pc click here to download Download Pc Games. Free and safe download. Download the latest version of the top software, games, programs and apps in Download Pc Game. Free and safe download. Download the latest version of the top software, games, programs and apps in Thanks to a bundling service called Ninite, you can download and install most First, we're going to give a brief overview of the programs we suggest Notepad ++ - (Optional) If you tend to dig through HTML files, game inis. Download LogMeIn Hamachi It's a really clever bit of free software for your gaming PC, and it's Download Razer Cortex: Game Booster. Free Software Download with Download Astro. Recommended Windows PC apps, reviews and rating. All the best free software and games for Windows. Like playing computer games? The Soft32 site offers free games download for users. Take advantage of the range and selection of their download games. Do as you please in your games Review With the download of Cheat Engine you will be able to shift the creation power from game developers to. The very best free PC games hand selected by the Gizmo's Freeware editors. You don't need to spend a cent on game software when there are many freebies . Game Downloader, free and safe download. Game Downloader latest version: Game Downloader gives access to Great utility kit for PC maintenance · Free. 8 . and gaming. Download safely and also discover alternative software you can try. CCleaner is the number-one tool for cleaning your computer.
    [Show full text]
  • The Next Great Copyright Act
    THE NEXT GREAT COPYRIGHT ACT Twenty-Sixth Horace S. Manges Lecture by Maria A. Pallante1 I. INTRODUCTION Tonight my topic is the next great copyright act, but before I speak about the future, I would like to talk a little about the past, including the role of the Copyright Office in past revision activities. In my remarks, I will address the need for comprehensive review and revision of U.S. copyright law, identify the most significant issues, and suggest a framework by which Congress should weigh the public interest, which includes the interests of authors. I also will address the necessary evolution of the Copyright Office itself. Those of you who have been to our offices in Washington know that we have a conference room featuring portraits of the former Registers of Copyright dating back to 1897.2 When guests are seated at our table, the former Registers preside on high, wearing a variety of expressions and overseeing complex conversations about copyright law in the digital age. Sometimes I think they would be startled by the discussions we have, but then again it might all sound familiar. Solberg (1887-1933) Thorvald Solberg was the first and longest-serving Register of Copyrights. He seems inspired in his portrait, and for good reason. Solberg was a visionary leader, a champion of authors’ rights, and an early advocate for the United States’ adherence to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (“Berne Convention”).3 Under his care, the Copyright Office grew from a handful of employees to more than a hundred professional staff, and took on the many assorted roles that are still critical to the mission of the Office today.
    [Show full text]
  • The Orrin Hatch – Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act
    The Orrin Hatch – Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act A Guide for Sound Recordings Collectors This study was written by Eric Harbeson, on behalf of and commissioned by the National Recording Preservation Board. Members of the National Recording Preservation Board American Federation of Musicians National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences Billy Linneman Maureen Droney Alternate: Daryl Friedman American Folklore Society Burt Feintuch (in memoriam) National Archives and Records Administration Alternate: Timothy Lloyd Daniel Rooney Alternate: Tom Nastick American Musicological Society Judy Tsou Recording Industry Association of America Alternate: Patrick Warfield David Hughes Alternate: Patrick Kraus American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers SESAC Elizabeth Matthews John JosePhson Alternate: John Titta Alternate: Eric Lense Association for Recorded Sound Collections Society For Ethnomusicology David Seubert Jonathan Kertzer Alternate: Bill Klinger Alternate: Alan Burdette Audio Engineering Society Songwriters Hall of Fame George Massenburg Linda Moran Alternate: Elizabeth Cohen Alternate: Robbin Ahrold Broadcast Music, Incorporated At-Large Michael O'Neill Michael Feinstein Alternate: Michael Collins At-Large Country Music Foundation Brenda Nelson-Strauss Kyle Young Alternate: Eileen Hayes Alternate: Alan Stoker At-Large Digital Media Association Mickey Hart Garrett Levin Alternate: ChristoPher H. Sterling Alternate: Sally Rose Larson At-Large Music Business Association Bob Santelli Portia Sabin Alternate: Al Pryor Alternate: Paul JessoP At-Large Music Library Association Eric Schwartz James Farrington Alternate: John Simson Alternate: Maristella Feustle Abstract: The Music Modernization Act is reviewed in detail, with a Particular eye toward the implications for members of the community suPPorted by the National Recording Preservation Board, including librarians, archivists, and Private collectors. The guide attemPts an exhaustive treatment using Plain but legally precise language.
    [Show full text]
  • Money for Something: Music Licensing in the 21St Century
    Money for Something: Music Licensing in the 21st Century Updated February 23, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R43984 SUMMARY R43984 Money for Something: Music Licensing in the February 23, 2021 21st Century Dana A. Scherer Songwriters and recording artists are generally entitled to receive compensation for Specialist in (1) reproductions, distributions, and public performances of the notes and lyrics they create (the Telecommunications musical works), as well as (2) reproductions, distributions, and certain digital public Policy performances of the recorded sound of their voices combined with instruments (the sound recordings). The amount they receive, as well as their control over their music, depends on market forces, contracts between a variety of private-sector entities, and laws governing copyright and competition policy. Who pays whom, as well as who can sue whom for copyright infringement, depends in part on the mode of listening to music. Congress enacted several major updates to copyright laws in 2018 in the Orrin G. Hatch-Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act (MMA; P.L. 115-264). The MMA modified copyright laws related to the process of granting and receiving statutory licenses for the reproduction and distribution of musical works (known as “mechanical licenses”). The law set forth terms for the creation of a nonprofit “mechanical licensing collective” through which owners of copyrights in musical works could collect royalties from online music services. The law also changed the standards used by a group of federal administrative law judges, the Copyright Royalty Board, to set royalty rates for some statutory copyright licenses, as well as the standards used by a federal court to set rates for licenses to publicly perform musical works offered by two organizations representing publishers and composers, ASCAP and BMI.
    [Show full text]
  • The RIAA, the DMCA, and the Forgotten Few Webcasters: a Call for Change in Digital Copyright Royalties
    Federal Communications Law Journal Volume 61 Issue 2 Article 7 3-2009 The RIAA, the DMCA, and the Forgotten Few Webcasters: A Call for Change in Digital Copyright Royalties Kellen Myers Indiana University Maurer School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/fclj Part of the Administrative Law Commons, Antitrust and Trade Regulation Commons, Communications Law Commons, Intellectual Property Law Commons, Internet Law Commons, and the Legislation Commons Recommended Citation Myers, Kellen (2009) "The RIAA, the DMCA, and the Forgotten Few Webcasters: A Call for Change in Digital Copyright Royalties," Federal Communications Law Journal: Vol. 61 : Iss. 2 , Article 7. Available at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/fclj/vol61/iss2/7 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Federal Communications Law Journal by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The RIAA, the DMCA, and the Forgotten Few Webcasters: A Call for Change in Digital Copyright Royalties Kellen Myers* I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................... 432 II. WEBCASTING AND COPYRIGHT LAW: A HISTORY ................... 435 A. How Webcasting Works ................................................... 435 B. CopyrightBackground .................................................... 435 C. The Musical Work (Composition)
    [Show full text]
  • The Business of Video Games Report
    The Business of Video Games Report About DFC Intelligence’s The Business of Video Games Report The Business of Video Games report consists of two pdf documents 1) a 140-slide presentation created in Microsoft PowerPoint and 2) a 180-page report created in Microsoft Word. These documents each contain very different looks at the game industry but use the same set of underlying data and key assumptions. As a business overview, this report does not focus heavily on raw numbers and data. Instead it is a more qualitative analysis of the game industry providing context around major historical and anticipated trends. DFC Intelligence provides plenty of industry data and detailed forecasts but it is important that those forecasts do not exist in a vacuum. The data only tells part of the story and this report looks to fill in the story behind the data. This report is a designed to provide a high-level overview of the general game industry size and how the game industry works across its entire value chain. There is a focus on the role of major industry players from hardware manufacturers to distributors and content developers. A great deal of the focus is on who makes the money when a consumer buys a video game. Published by DFC Intelligence www.dfcint.com 858.834.4340 1 ©2018 DFC Intelligence. The Business of Video Games Report The Business of Video Games PowerPoint Summary • PowerPoint Outline – Executive Summary (Slides 3-10): An overview of market size and general segmentation – Industry Value Chain (Slides 11-15): This is a high level introduction
    [Show full text]