DOCSLIB.ORG

C:\Users\Petermenell\Desktop\BCLT Software Conference\Rise of The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Draft: 1-18-17 Rise of the API Copyright Dead?: An Updated Epitaph for Copyright Protection of Network and Functional Features of Computer Software Peter S. Menell* ABSTRACT After a decade of bruising legal battles, the courts and software industry norms largely resolved the costly war over the scope of copyright protection for computer software. By the mid 1990s, freedom to develop interoperable devices, systems, and software triumphed over broad copyright protection for network features of computer software. Copyright peace prevailed throughout the software industry for the next 15 years. But in 2010, Oracle reignited the smoldering embers of that war when it brought suit alleging that Google infringed copyright in the Java application program interface packages (APIs) . This article updates and expands upon an earlier “epitaph” for copyright protection of network features of computer software to address the second API copyright wave. As background, Part I reviews the first wave of API copyright legislation and litigation. Part II examines the Oracle v. Google litigation, tracing the development of Java and Android and the subsequent (and still ongoing) battle over the scope of copyright protection for APIs. Part III critically analyzes the Oracle v. Google decisions. It explains that copyright law’s fundamental exclusion of protection for functional features dictates that the labeling conventions and packaging of functions within interface specifications generally fall outside of the scope of copyright protection even as implementing code garners thin copyright protection. This interpretation of copyright law comports with fundamental principles channeling protection among the modes of intellectual property. It also serves the larger goals of intellectual property law and competition policy. * Koret Professor of Law and Director of the Berkeley Center for Law & Technology, University of California at Berkeley School of Law. I am grateful to Jonathan Band, Dylan Hadfield- Menell, Mark Lemley, David Nimmer, and Tim Simcoe for comments on an earlier draft. -1- Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2893192 Rise of the API Copyright Dead?: An Updated Epitaph for Copyright Protection of Network and Functional Features of Computer Software TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Copyright Protection for Computer Software 1.0 A. A Personal Account B. Setting the Stage 1. The Intellectual Property Backdrop: Legislation and Legislative History 2. Network Economics 3. The Industrial Backdrop C. The API Copyright War 1. Jurisprudence i. The Early Years ii. The Modern Software Copyright Era 2. Legislative Developments D. The End to the API Copyright War and the Logic of the Intellectual Property System II. Copyright Protection for Computer Software 2.0: The Oracle v. Google Wave A. The Technological and Industrial Context 1. The Java Story i. The Corporate Environment: Sun Microsystems in the 1980s and 1990s ii. Development of Java iii. The Setting Sun 2. Google, the Mobile Computing Revolution, and Development of Android 3. Oracle’s Acquisition of Sun Microsystems B. The Oracle v. Google Litigation 1. Oracle’s Complaint and Pretrial Case Management 2. 2012 Trial 3. Federal Circuit Reversal i. Copyrightability a. Declaring Code b. SSO of the API Packages ii. Fair Use 4. Interlocutory Certiorari Petition 5. 2016 Fair Use Trial i. Opening Arguments ii. Google’s Case in Chief iii. Oracle’s Case in Chief iv. Google’s Rebuttal v. Closing Arguments vi. Jury Vedict -2- Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2893192 6. The Road Ahead C. The Current Murky State of API Copyright Protection III. The Law and Economics of API Copyright Protection A. Legal Analysis 1. Overarching Principles 2. Critique of the Federal Circuit Copyrightability Decision i. Misinterpreting Section 102(b) ii. Misreading Ninth Circuit Jurisprudence a. Viability of the Lotus Decision in the Ninth Circuit b. Disregarding the Sega/Sony Decisions c. Resurrecting the Third Circuit’s Apple/Whelan Decisions iii. Conflation of Expressive and Technological “Creativity” iv. Overly Rigid Approach to Limiting Doctrines v. Treating API Design as Variable Expression Rather than Unique Function 3. Proper Legal Frameworks for Analyzing Copyright Protection for Computer Software i. API Design ii. Computer Code iii. Other Software Elements B. Policy Analysis 1. Economic Analysis of Legal Protection for Computer Software i. The Public Goods Problem ii. Network Externalities 2. The Evolution of Software Markets 3. The Optimality of Limited Copyright Protection for Computer Software 4. Impediments to Achieving the Proper Copyright Balance Posed by the Oracle v. Google Litigation Conclusions -3- Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2893192 Rise of the API Copyright Dead?: An Updated Epitaph for Copyright Protection of Network and Functional Features of Computer Software As the great Yogi Berra redundantly said, “It’s like déjà vu all over again.”1 For IP scholars and practitioners of my generation, Oracle Corporation’s lawsuit alleging that Google’s Android mobile platform infringes copyright in the Java application program interface (API) elements has been a stroll down memory lane.2 Or perhaps less nostalgically for those in the software industry, a zombie horror film set in Silicon Valley.3 I cut my teeth analyzing the scope of copyright protection for network and other functional features of computer software. My first foray into intellectual property scholarship examined the interplay among the utilitarian nature of computer programming, the distinctive network economics of software markets, and the role of copyright protection within the larger 1 See YOGI BERRA, THE YOGI BOOK: I DIDN’T SAY EVERYTHING I SAID 9 (1998) (explaining that the déjà vu quotation was inspired by Yankees’ sluggers Mickey Mantle and Roger Maris repeated back-to-back home runs in the early 1960s). 2 As Judge Alsup noted in an early ruling in the Oracle litigation, “[t]he term API is slippery.” See ORDER PARTIALLY GRANTING AND PARTIALLY DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON COPYRIGHT CLAIM, p.4 Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc. 3:10-cv-03561-WHA (filed Sep. 15, 2011). We will examine the varying and evolving meaning of API throughout this journey. 3 Cf. List of Zombie Films, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_zombie_films. Commentary and news reporting of the Oracle case spoke in dire terms. See, e.g., Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, Oracle v. Google, and the End of Programming as We Know It, COMPUTERWORLD (May 16, 2016), http://www.computerworld.com/article/3070001/application-development/oracle-v-google-and-t he-end-of-programming-as-we-know-it.html; Klint Finley, The Oracle-Google Case Will Decide the Future of Software, WIRED (May 23, 2016) (opining that “nothing less is at stake [in the outcome of the Oracle v. Google litigation] than the future of programming”), http://www.wired.com/2016/05/oracle-google-case-will-decide-future-software/; Joe Mullin, Second Oracle v. Google Trial Could Lead to Huge Headaches for Developers, arstechnica (May 8, 2016) (reporting that if those who develop APIs “can use copyright law to control how programming is done, there will be a sea change in industry practices. For many developers, especially of open source software, this will be a change for the worse”), http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/05/round-2-of-oracle-v-google-is-an-unpredictable-trial- over-api-fair-use/. -4- intellectual property system.4 Along with other scholars and practitioners,5 I wrote about and filed amicus briefs in battles over interoperability,6 reverse engineering,7 graphical user 4 See Peter S. Menell, Tailoring Legal Protection for Computer Software, 39 STAN. L. REV. 1329 (1987) (based on my third year paper at Harvard Law School); Peter S. Menell, Analysis of the Scope of Copyright Protection for Application Programs, 41 STAN. L. REV. 1045 (1989); Peter S. Menell, The Challenges of Reforming Intellectual Property Protection for Computer Software, 94 COLUM. L. REV. 2644 (1994); Dennis S. Karjala & Peter S. Menell, Applying Fundamental Copyright Principles to Lotus Development Corp. v. Borland Int’l, Inc., 10 HIGH TECH. L.J. 177 (1995). 5 Professors Dennis Karjala, Jerome Reichman, and Pamela Samuelson, copyright treatise authors Paul Goldstein and David Nimmer, practitioners Jonathan Band, Peter Choy, David Hayes, Michael Jacobs, Gary Reback, and Richard Stern, economists Joseph Farrell and Brian Kahin, and computer scientist Randal Davis were among the early fellow travelers. The network economics research of Professors Joseph Farrell, Michael Katz, Garth Saloner, and Carl Shapiro provided valuable insights. As the first wave of copyright API litigation was building, Professors Karjala, Samuelson, and I convened a broad range of intellectual property scholars, practitioners, software experts, and economists to examine the emerging issues and jurisprudential puzzles. That conference produced a consensus report among the legal academics that helped clarify key software copyright issues and foreshadowed important legal developments. See Donald S. Chisum, Rochelle Cooper Dreyfuss, Paul Goldstein, Robert A. Gorman, Dennis S. Karjala, Edmund W. Kitch, Peter S. Menell, Leo J. Raskind, Jerome H. Reichman & Pamela Samuelson, LaST Frontier Conference on Copyright Protection of Computer Software, 30 JURIMETRICS J. 15 (1989) (hereinafter cited as “LaST Frontier Software Report.” In addition, I advised the U.S. Congress’s Office of Technology Assessment, which produced several useful reports. See U.S. CONGRESS, OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, FINDING A BALANCE: COMPUTER SOFTWARE, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, AND THE CHALLENGE OF TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE, OTA-TCT-527 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, May 1992), http://ota.fas.org/reports/9215.pdf; U.S. CONGRESS, OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, COMPUTER SOFTWARE AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY–BACKGROUND PAPER, OTA-BP-CIT-61 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, March 1990), http://ota.fas.org/reports/9009.pdf. 6 See Computer Associates Int’l v. Altai, Inc., 982 F.2d 693 (2d Cir. 1992); Apple Computer, Inc. v. Franklin Computer Corp., 714 F.2d 1240 (3d Cir. 1983). 7 See Sega Enterprises Ltd.
Recommended publications
  • IJIMAI20163 6.Pdf

    IJIMAI20163 6.Pdf

    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERACTIVE MULTIMEDIA AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ISSN: 1989-1660–VOL. III, NUMBER 6 IMAI RESEARCH GROUP COUNCIL Executive Director - Dr. Jesús Soto Carrión, Pontifical University of Salamanca, Spain Research Director - Dr. Rubén González Crespo, Universidad Internacional de La Rioja - UNIR, Spain Financial Director - Dr. Oscar Sanjuán Martínez, ElasticBox, USA Office of Publications Director - Lic. Ainhoa Puente, Universidad Internacional de La Rioja - UNIR, Spain Director, Latin-America regional board - Dr. Carlos Enrique Montenegro Marín, Francisco José de Caldas District University, Colombia EDITORIAL TEAM Editor-in-Chief Dr. Rubén González Crespo, Universidad Internacional de La Rioja – UNIR, Spain Associate Editors Dr. Jordán Pascual Espada, ElasticBox, USA Dr. Juan Pavón Mestras, Complutense University of Madrid, Spain Dr. Alvaro Rocha, University of Coimbra, Portugal Dr. Jörg Thomaschewski, Hochschule Emden/Leer, Emden, Germany Dr. Carlos Enrique Montenegro Marín, Francisco José de Caldas District University, Colombia Dr. Vijay Bhaskar Semwal, Indian Institute of Technology, Allahabad, India Editorial Board Members Dr. Rory McGreal, Athabasca University, Canada Dr. Abelardo Pardo, University of Sidney, Australia Dr. Hernán Sasastegui Chigne, UPAO, Perú Dr. Lei Shu, Osaka University, Japan Dr. León Welicki, Microsoft, USA Dr. Enrique Herrera, University of Granada, Spain Dr. Francisco Chiclana, De Montfort University, United Kingdom Dr. Luis Joyanes Aguilar, Pontifical University of Salamanca, Spain Dr. Ioannis Konstantinos Argyros, Cameron University, USA Dr. Juan Manuel Cueva Lovelle, University of Oviedo, Spain Dr. Pekka Siirtola, University of Oulu, Finland Dr. Francisco Mochón Morcillo, National Distance Education University, Spain Dr. Manuel Pérez Cota, University of Vigo, Spain Dr. Walter Colombo, Hochschule Emden/Leer, Emden, Germany Dr. Javier Bajo Pérez, Polytechnic University of Madrid, Spain Dr.
  • How to Set up Google Alerts

    How to Set up Google Alerts

    How To Set Up Google Alerts 1) Type google alerts in your browser Type Google Alerts in your browser and click on www.google.com/alerts 2) Set up your alerts In Search Query put in the topics you want google to source out for you. It might be of interest to have your name, your company domain, competitors domains, keywords you'd like to source information about or whatever you'd like to research. Enter the email address you want the alerts to go to. 3) Verify your alert Login into your email address that the alert is going to and verify it by clicking on the link. 4) Set up folders/labels so alerts skip your inbox (we will use Gmail for this example) 1) Tick the alerts that have come to your inbox. 2) Click on More, in the drop down menu choose 'Filter messages like these' 5) Create filter 1) Just click on 'create filter with this search' 6) Applying label/folder for alert to skip inbox. (Gmail calls folders labels, you can set them up under 'settings', 'labels'. 1) Tick skip the inbox (helps keep your inbox free) 2) Tick apply label 3) Choose what label (Here we have called it Alerts) 4) Tick to apply other alerts if found any 5) Create filter This is one easy way for information you are interested in to come to you. By setting up Alert Folders or Labels as Gmail calls them, they won't clog up your inbox, keeping it clear and leaving you to your choosing when you want to check your alerts for any useful information.
  • Recent Developments in Cybersecurity Melanie J

    Recent Developments in Cybersecurity Melanie J

    American University Business Law Review Volume 2 | Issue 2 Article 1 2013 Fiddling on the Roof: Recent Developments in Cybersecurity Melanie J. Teplinsky Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/aublr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Teplinsky, Melanie J. "Fiddling on the Roof: Recent Developments in Cybersecurity." American University Business Law Review 2, no. 2 (2013): 225-322. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in American University Business Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLES FIDDLING ON THE ROOF: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN CYBERSECURITY MELANIE J. TEPLINSKY* TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .......................................... ..... 227 I. The Promise and Peril of Cyberspace .............. ........ 227 II. Self-Regulation and the Challenge of Critical Infrastructure ......... 232 III. The Changing Face of Cybersecurity: Technology Trends ............ 233 A. Mobile Technology ......................... 233 B. Cloud Computing ........................... ...... 237 C. Social Networking ................................. 241 IV. The Changing Face of Cybersecurity: Cyberthreat Trends ............ 244 A. Cybercrime ................................. ..... 249 1. Costs of Cybercrime
  • The Performance Paradox of the JVM: Why More Hardware Means More

    The Performance Paradox of the JVM: Why More Hardware Means More

    Expert Tip The Performance Paradox of the JVM: Why More Hardware Means More As computer hardware gets cheaper and faster, administrators managing Java based servers are frequently encountering serious problems when managing their runtime environments. JVM handles the task of garbage collection for the developer - cleaning up the space a developer has allocated for objects once an instance no longer has any references pointing to it. Some garbage collection is done quickly and invisibly. But certain sanitation tasks, which fortunately occur with minimal frequency, take significantly longer, causing the JVM to pause, and raising the ire of end users and administrators alike. Read this TheServerSide.com Expert Tip to better understand the JVM performance problem, how the JVM manages memory and how best to approach JVM Performance. Sponsored By: TheServerSide.com Expert Tip The Performance Paradox of the JVM: Why More Hardware Means More Expert Tip The Performance Paradox of the JVM: Why More Hardware Means More Table of Contents The Performance Paradox of the JVM: Why More Hardware Means More Failures Resources from Azul Systems Sponsored By: Page 2 of 8 TheServerSide.com Expert Tip The Performance Paradox of the JVM: Why More Hardware Means More The Performance Paradox of the JVM: Why More Hardware Means More Failures By Cameron McKenzie The Problem of the Unpredictable Pause As computer hardware gets cheaper and faster, administrators managing Java based servers are frequently encountering serious problems when managing their runtime environments. While our servers are getting decked out with faster and faster hardware, the Java Virtual Machines (JVMs) that are running on them can't effectively leverage the extra hardware without hitting a wall and temporarily freezing.
  • Java (Programming Langua a (Programming Language)

    Java (Programming Langua a (Programming Language)

    Java (programming language) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedialopedia "Java language" redirects here. For the natural language from the Indonesian island of Java, see Javanese language. Not to be confused with JavaScript. Java multi-paradigm: object-oriented, structured, imperative, Paradigm(s) functional, generic, reflective, concurrent James Gosling and Designed by Sun Microsystems Developer Oracle Corporation Appeared in 1995[1] Java Standard Edition 8 Update Stable release 5 (1.8.0_5) / April 15, 2014; 2 months ago Static, strong, safe, nominative, Typing discipline manifest Major OpenJDK, many others implementations Dialects Generic Java, Pizza Ada 83, C++, C#,[2] Eiffel,[3] Generic Java, Mesa,[4] Modula- Influenced by 3,[5] Oberon,[6] Objective-C,[7] UCSD Pascal,[8][9] Smalltalk Ada 2005, BeanShell, C#, Clojure, D, ECMAScript, Influenced Groovy, J#, JavaScript, Kotlin, PHP, Python, Scala, Seed7, Vala Implementation C and C++ language OS Cross-platform (multi-platform) GNU General Public License, License Java CommuniCommunity Process Filename .java , .class, .jar extension(s) Website For Java Developers Java Programming at Wikibooks Java is a computer programming language that is concurrent, class-based, object-oriented, and specifically designed to have as few impimplementation dependencies as possible.ble. It is intended to let application developers "write once, run ananywhere" (WORA), meaning that code that runs on one platform does not need to be recompiled to rurun on another. Java applications ns are typically compiled to bytecode (class file) that can run on anany Java virtual machine (JVM)) regardless of computer architecture. Java is, as of 2014, one of tthe most popular programming ng languages in use, particularly for client-server web applications, witwith a reported 9 million developers.[10][11] Java was originallyy developed by James Gosling at Sun Microsystems (which has since merged into Oracle Corporation) and released in 1995 as a core component of Sun Microsystems'Micros Java platform.
  • R, the Software, Finds Fans

    R, the Software, Finds Fans

    R, the Software, Finds Fans in Data Analysts - NYTimes.com http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/07/technology/business-computing/0... W elcom e to Get Started TimesPeople Lets You Share and Discover the Best of NYTimes.com 12:48 PM Tim esPeople No, thanks W hat‘s this? HOME PAGE TODAY'S PAPER VIDEO MOST POPULAR TIMES TOPICS My Account W elcome, corostat Log Out Help Search All NYTimes.com Business Com puting WORLD U.S. N.Y. / REGION BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY SCIENCE HEALTH SPORTS OPINION ARTS STYLE TRAVEL JOBS REAL ESTATE AUTOS Search Technology Inside Technology Bits Personal Tech » Internet Start-Ups Business Computing Companies Blog » Cellphones, Cameras, Computers and more Data Analysts Captivated by R‘s Power More Articles in Technology » Stuart Isett for The New York Times R first appeared in 1996, when the statistics professors Robert Gentleman, left, and Ross Ihaka released the code as a free software package. By ASHLEE VANCE Published: January 6, 2009 E-MAIL To some people R is just the 18th letter of the alphabet. To others, PRINT it‘s the rating on racy movies, a measure of an attic‘s insulation or SINGLE PAGE Advertise on NYTimes.com what pirates in movies say. REPRINTS SAVE Breaking News Alerts by E-Mail R is also the name of a popular SHARE Sign up to be notified when important news breaks. Related programming language used by a colombi@ unibg.it Bits: R You Ready for R? growing number of data analysts Change E-mail Address | Privacy Policy The R Project for Statistical inside corporations and academia.
  • The Java® Language Specification Java SE 8 Edition

    The Java® Language Specification Java SE 8 Edition

    The Java® Language Specification Java SE 8 Edition James Gosling Bill Joy Guy Steele Gilad Bracha Alex Buckley 2015-02-13 Specification: JSR-337 Java® SE 8 Release Contents ("Specification") Version: 8 Status: Maintenance Release Release: March 2015 Copyright © 1997, 2015, Oracle America, Inc. and/or its affiliates. 500 Oracle Parkway, Redwood City, California 94065, U.S.A. All rights reserved. Oracle and Java are registered trademarks of Oracle and/or its affiliates. Other names may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Specification provided herein is provided to you only under the Limited License Grant included herein as Appendix A. Please see Appendix A, Limited License Grant. To Maurizio, with deepest thanks. Table of Contents Preface to the Java SE 8 Edition xix 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Organization of the Specification 2 1.2 Example Programs 6 1.3 Notation 6 1.4 Relationship to Predefined Classes and Interfaces 7 1.5 Feedback 7 1.6 References 7 2 Grammars 9 2.1 Context-Free Grammars 9 2.2 The Lexical Grammar 9 2.3 The Syntactic Grammar 10 2.4 Grammar Notation 10 3 Lexical Structure 15 3.1 Unicode 15 3.2 Lexical Translations 16 3.3 Unicode Escapes 17 3.4 Line Terminators 19 3.5 Input Elements and Tokens 19 3.6 White Space 20 3.7 Comments 21 3.8 Identifiers 22 3.9 Keywords 24 3.10 Literals 24 3.10.1 Integer Literals 25 3.10.2 Floating-Point Literals 31 3.10.3 Boolean Literals 34 3.10.4 Character Literals 34 3.10.5 String Literals 35 3.10.6 Escape Sequences for Character and String Literals 37 3.10.7 The Null Literal 38 3.11 Separators
  • Google Wave Failure: Lesson Learned for Diffusion of an Online Collaboration Tool

    Google Wave Failure: Lesson Learned for Diffusion of an Online Collaboration Tool

    GOOGLE WAVE FAILURE: LESSON LEARNED FOR DIFFUSION OF AN ONLINE COLLABORATION TOOL Laddawan Kaewkitipong Peter Ractham Department of Management Information Systems Thammasat Business School, Thammasat University Thailand INTRODUCTION Background and Motivation Collaboration has become increasingly important to the success of today’s enterprises. Modern organizations have been attempting to capitalize on their ability to collaborate between business units and manufacturing facilities to develop better products and services [17]. To achieve their goals, they no longer rely only on internal collaboration within their organization, but also on working closely and exchanging ideas with external partners. In other words, collaboration is viewed as a critical success factor in achieving a sustainable competitive advantage [2]. The need to collaborate is also seen in everyday’s life. A family, which has one or more family members who live abroad, might need to find a way to plan their holiday together. A group of friends who want to organize a party may need a tool to help them obtain common decisions more efficiently. As a result, many collaboration tools have been implemented to facilitate this kind of information sharing as well as decision-making tasks. Nevertheless, little has been reported on adoption success of such tools. In fact, diffusion of collaboration tools still remains as one of the most challenging problems in the area of IS research [31, 43]. Challenged by the problems and considering collaboration important activities, Google has launched many online tools to promote collaboration. Some of their popular tools are Gmail, Google Docs, and Google Calendar. An infamous tool, Google Wave, was one of the most ambitious products which many features that can help to facilitate online collaboration.
  • From Safe Harbor to Choppy Waters: Youtube, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act,And a Much Needed Change of Course

    From Safe Harbor to Choppy Waters: Youtube, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act,And a Much Needed Change of Course

    Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law Volume 10 Issue 1 Issue 1 - Fall 2007 Article 3 2007 From Safe Harbor to Choppy Waters: YouTube, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act,and a Much Needed Change of Course Lauren B. Patten Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/jetlaw Part of the Intellectual Property Law Commons, and the Internet Law Commons Recommended Citation Lauren B. Patten, From Safe Harbor to Choppy Waters: YouTube, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act,and a Much Needed Change of Course, 10 Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law 179 (2020) Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/jetlaw/vol10/iss1/3 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law by an authorized editor of Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. From Safe Harbor to Choppy Waters: YouTube, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and a Much Needed Change of Course ABSTRACT YouTube.com, named Time magazine's "Invention of the Year" for 2006 and widely recognized as the most-visited video site on the Internet, has changed the face of online entertainment. With the site's acquisition by Google in October 2006, the possibilities for YouTube's growth became truly endless. However, there is a darker side to the story of the Internet sensation, one that is grounded in its potential liability for copyright infringement. The issue is that many of the most-viewed and most-popular videos on the site are copyrighted.
  • Tulane Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property

    Tulane Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property

    TULANE JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY VOLUME 10 FALL 2007 Increasing Access to Knowledge Through Fair Use—Analyzing the Google Litigation To Unleash Developing Countries Douglas L. Rogers* I. ACCESS TO KNOWLEDGE ...................................................................... 3 II. IN SPITE OF THE COPYING OF COMPLETE WORKS, THE PROVISION OF LIMITED INFORMATION FROM THE GOOGLE DATABASE MAKES THE LIBRARY PROJECT A FAIR USE ........................ 7 A. The Google Library Litigation ................................................... 7 B. Fair Use Is a Crucial Element of the Copyright Balance ........ 11 C. Increasing Access Favors Fair Use ........................................... 21 1. Sony: Time-Shifting Is a Fair Use ................................... 21 2. Campbell: Increasing Access Through Transformative Works Favors Fair Use ........................... 27 3. Summary .......................................................................... 30 D. It Is the End Result that Counts in Determining Fair Use ............................................................................................. 31 1. Fair Use Seeks a Balanced Result ................................... 31 2. Interim Scanning of a Picture and Then Modifying It ...................................................................... 33 a. Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp. ....................................... 33 b. Bill Graham Archives v. Dorling Kindersley Ltd. ............................................................................ 35 * © 2007
  • 3. Internet – Participating in the Knowledge Society

    3. Internet – Participating in the Knowledge Society

    3. Internet – Participating in the knowledge society “Knowledge is power. Information is liberating. Education is the premise of progress, in every society, in every family.” Kofi Annan, former Secretary General of the United Nations, January 1997-December 2006 CHECKLIST FACT SHEET 10 – SEARCHING FOR INFORMATION Do you read the disclaimer when you are consulting a website? How can you be sure the information you find is factual and objective? Do you consult several websites to check your facts? CHECKLIST FACT SHEET 11 – FINDING QUALITY INFORMATION ON THE WEB Before downloading files, do you check that your anti-virus software is active? If you get your news from the Internet, do you seek multiple perspectives on the same story? Clean out your cookies from time to time to avoid being “profiled” by search engines. CHECKLIST FACT SHEET 12 – DISTANCE LEARNING AND MOOCs Choose a method of distance learning that is appropriate for you: determine what type of learning (synchronous, asynchronous, open schedule, hybrid distance learning) will best help you reach your goals. Before selecting a distance learning course, research the reviews – both from students and teachers. Take adequate precautions to ensure that your computer equipment and software is secure from hackers, viruses and other threats. CHECKLIST FACT SHEET 13 – SHOPPING ONLINE Do not make online purchases on unsecure Internet connections. Understand and agree to the key information provided about the product or service. Disable in-app purchases on your smartphone or tablet. Do not believe all user recommendations you see, creating “user” recommendations can also be a money-making business. Fact sheet 11 Finding quality information on the Web he original idea behind the creation of the Internet1 was to develop an electronic library for the Teasy access and distribution of information2.
  • Efficient Monitoring Algorithm for Fast News Alerts

    Efficient Monitoring Algorithm for Fast News Alerts

    1 Efficient Monitoring Algorithm for Fast News Alerts Ka Cheung Sia, Junghoo Cho, and Hyun-Kyu Cho Abstract— Recently, there has been a dramatic increase in and its appearance at the aggregator? Note that the aggregation the use of XML data to deliver information over the Web. can be done either at a desktop (e.g., RSS feed readers) or at Personal weblogs, news Web sites, and discussion forums are a central server (e.g., Personalized Yahoo/Google homepage). now publishing RSS feeds for their subscribers to retrieve new postings. As the popularity of personal weblogs and the RSS While some of our developed techniques can be applied to the feeds grow rapidly, RSS aggregation services and blog search desktop-based aggregation, in this paper we primarily focus on engines have appeared, which try to provide a central access the server-based aggregation scenario. This problem is similar point for simpler access and discovery of new content from a to the index refresh problem for Web-search engines [7], [9], large number of diverse RSS sources. In this paper, we study how [11], [13], [15], [30], [31], [40], but two important properties the RSS aggregation services should monitor the data sources to retrieve new content quickly using minimal resources and to of the information in the RSS domain make this problem provide its subscribers with fast news alerts. We believe that unique and interesting: the change characteristics of RSS sources and the general user • The information in the RSS domain is often time sensi- access behavior pose distinct requirements that make this task significantly different from the traditional index refresh problem tive.