INF 390N: Information Policy: Music, , and Technology

Unique ID#: 27897 Spring Semester 2015 Mondays: 6–9 p.m. UTA 1.504

Instructor: Mark A. Davidson [email protected]

Teaching Assistant: Benjamin Houtman, [email protected]

Office Hours: By appointment, email

Objectives • To introduce the student to the concepts of music and ownership/authorship, music copyright law both in the United States and abroad. • To provide the student with familiarity with navigating legal documents, both by Congress and various courts. • To introduce students to the idea of the Commons and alternatives to traditional legal claims of ownership. • To discuss the and issues of with regard to music scholarship and publication. • To provide a history of sound recording and music distribution technologies. • To familiarize students with the field of forensic musicology and the role of expert witnesses in music copyright cases. • To introduce students to the legal, moral, and ethical concerns in archiving audiovisual media collections

Deliverables (dates given in course schedule) • 3 short presentations (copyright in another country; historical court case; case) • Culminating project (of your choosing) in 4 parts: Proposal/Bibliography, First Draft, Peer Review, Final Draft

Grade Breakdown • Participation/Readings – 15% • Presentations (3) – 10% each = 30% • Proposal – 10% • First Draft – 10% • Peer Review – 10% • Final Draft – 25% • Total = 100%

Texts: All texts are available online or through the UT Library system as an e-Book or downloadable article. The one book that we will be reading in its entirety (which is also available for download), Jessica Litman’s Digital Copyright is small, thin, and cheap, and would be an excellent addition to your personal library if you decide to purchase a hard copy.

Films/Videos: All and videos are available for online streaming.

University of Texas Student Honor Code: The University’s expectations for student conduct are grounded in the University Code of Conduct: “The core values of The University of Texas at Austin are learning, discovery, freedom, leadership, individual opportunity, and responsibility. Each member of the University is expected to uphold these values through integrity, honesty, trust, fairness, and respect toward peers and community.” University students are also expected to uphold the Student Honor Code: “As a student of The University of Texas at Austin, I shall abide by the core values of the University and uphold academic integrity.” University students are also expected to abide by all city, state, and federal laws and

1 statutes and all regulations of the University and The University of Texas System. However, as a community of scholars, the University expects from its students a higher standard of conduct than that required simply to avoid discipline. The principles of the Student Honor Code together with the University Code of Conduct should govern and direct student conduct, to promote a safe environment that is conducive to academic success and to ensure that each University student graduates ready to contribute to society as an ethical citizen. [From General Catalog, Appendix C, Chapter 11: Student Discipline and Conduct http://catalog.utexas.edu/general-information/appendices/appendix-c/student-discipline-and-conduct/]

Documented Disability Statement Any student with a documented disability who requires academic accommodations should contact Services for Students with Disabilities (SSD) at (512) 471-6259 (voice) or 1-866-329 3986 (video phone). Faculty are not required to provide accommodations without an official accommodation letter from SSD. • Please notify me as quickly as possible if the material being presented in class is not accessible (e.g., instructional videos need captioning, course packets are not readable for proper alternative text conversion, etc.). • Please notify me as early in the semester as possible if disability-related accommodations for field trips are required. Advanced notice will permit the arrangement of accommodations on the given day (e.g., transportation, site accessibility, etc.). Contact Services for Students with Disabilities at 471-6259 (voice) or 1-866-329-3986 (video phone) or reference SSD’s website for more disability-related information: http://www.utexas.edu/diversity/ddce/ssd/for_cstudents.php

2

COURSE SCHEDULE

Date Topic Readings (Due) Assignment (Due) Week 1 Course Introduction Jan 26

Week 2 Copyright Law in the United States Feb 2 Boyle; Litman; Websites: U.S Copyright Office; Universities Week 3 Copyright and Libraries/Archives Feb 9 Litman; Hirtle, et al; Brown and Brown; Websites: SAA, ALA, ARSC, ARL Week 4 Copyright, 1998 and forward Feb 16 DMCA, Sonny Bono, Eldred v. Ashcroft Litman; DMCA; Sonny Bono; Eldred, Lessig Week 5 Commons; Public Domain, World IP Feb 23 Public Domain, The Commons, Creative Boyle; Hardin; Lessig; Presentations – IP laws Commons, World IP outside the U.S. Week 6 Sound Recordings and Copyright – Part 1, History Mar 2 Music copyright, recordings, printing, Rutter, Morton, Suisman, Presentations – historical overview of technology Carroll, Mason, etc. music copyright cases Week 7 Sound Recordings and Copyright – Part 2; Pre-1972 Recordings, State laws Mar 9 State and common laws; rights to Jaszi, Besek, Subotnik, Brooks Project Proposal Due: privacy/publicity; current efforts Overview, Bibliography Week 8 SPRING BREAK Mar 16 NO CLASS

Week 9 Traditional Musics and Ownership Mar 23 Ownership and Authorship, McLeod, Seeger, Mitsui, Repatriation, Archival Ethics Laing, Zemp, etc. Week 10 Copyright and Visual Media Mar 30 , video, and photograph Sony case, National Film preservation and copyright, Sony case, Preservation Foundation, AE1 video rental store exemptions, De-Css Photograph Archiving book, case etc. Week 11 Pop Will Eat Itself – Part One Apr 6 The Music Industry; Music Copyright Beam, Begault, Presentation: Music Infringement; Forensic Musicology Vaidhyanathan, various Copyright Infringement Week 12 Pop Will Eat Itself – Part Two Apr 13 Sampling and Musical Borrowing; Boyle; Sewell; Draft Due ; Creativity vs. Copyright McLeod/DiCola; Films Week 13 Legal Music Distribution and the Law April 20 Radio/Payola; Music Streaming Debate Coase; Albini; Richardson; etc. Week 14 Not-So-Legal Music Distribution Apr 27 Piracy; Bootlegging; Torrenting; Vaidhyanathan; McLeod; Peer Review Due Napster; Grokster, Pirate Bay Marshall; Films Week 15 Other Media (Born Digital, Oral History, MOOCs, etc.); Wrap-Up May 4 Various May 10 Final Project Due

3

WEEK 1 (Jan. 26): Course Introduction (For your pre-class perusal): Higgins, Parker. “It's Copyright Week: Let's Take Copyright Back.” Electronic Frontier Foundation, https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/01/its-copyright-week-lets-take-copyright-back

Aoki, Keith, James Boyle, and Jennifer Jenkins. Bound by Law?: Tales from the Public Domain. CSPD, 2006. http://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/comics/zoomcomic.html

WEEK 2: Overview of U.S. Copyright Law and Boyle Chaps 1-2 in Boyle, James. The Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2009. Available as free PDF here: http://thepublicdomain.org/thepublicdomain1.pdf

Litman, Jessica. Digital Copyright. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2001, 11–76. Available as free PDF here: http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/56221/Digital?sequence=2

Familiarize yourselves with the following websites: U.S. Copyright Office http://www.copyright.gov/

“Timeline of Events.” http://copyright.gov/about/timeline.html

“Orphan Works.” http://copyright.gov/orphan/

United States Copyright Office. U.S. Copyright Office Practices (Third Edition), August 19, 2014, http://copyright.gov/comp3/

“Copyright Law of the United States,” http://copyright.gov/title17/

“Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code; Circular 92” http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap3.html

UC Berkeley “COPYRIGHT RESOURCES PROJECT: Working with Copyright–Protected Materials in a Digital Environment,” (and related links on the side). http://www.bampfa.berkeley.edu/copyright_project/copyritetoolbox/Toolbox_Bibliography.php

Columbia University Copyright Advisory Office http://copyright.columbia.edu/copyright/ (and all related side links) http://copyright.columbia.edu/copyright/copyright-in-general/

Cornell University Legal Information Institute Homepage - http://www.law.cornell.edu/

“U.S. Code: Title 17–Copyrights.” http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17

MIT Open Courseware – Video Lectures, Copyright http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and-computer-science/6-912-introduction-to-copyright-law- january-iap-2006/video-lectures/

WEEK 3: Libraries and Archives

4 Litman, Digital Copyright. 77–121.

Hirtle, Peter B., Emily Hudson, and Andrew Kenyon. Copyright and Cultural Institutions: Guidelines for U.S. Libraries, Archives, and Museums. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Library, 2009.

Brown, Richard Harvey, and Beth Davis-Brown. “The making of memory: the politics of archives, libraries and museums in the construction of national consciousness.” History of the Human Sciences, Vol. 11, No. 4 (1998): 17– 32.

Peterson, Gary, and Trudy Huskamp Peterson. Archives and Manuscripts: Law. Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1985.

Familiarize yourselves with the following websites: University of Texas – Copyright Crash Course; Copyright in the Library, http://copyright.lib.utexas.edu/l- 108abc.html

Society of American Archivists “Copyright,” http://www2.archivists.org/glossary/terms/c/copyright

“Copyright, Archival Institutions and the Digital Environment,” http://www.archivists.org/statements/stmt- copyright-arch.asp

“Disclaimer and Copyright Statement,” http://www2.archivists.org/disclaimer

“Guide to Deeds of Gift,” http://www2.archivists.org/publications/brochures/deeds-of-gift

“Issue Brief: Orphan Works,” http://www2.archivists.org/statements/issue-brief-orphan-works

“Maher Reports on WIPO Copyright Deliberations,” http://www2.archivists.org/news/2014/maher-reports-on-wipo- copyright-deliberations

“Notes on Copyright, Restrictions, and Unprocessed Collections,” http://www2.archivists.org/usingarchives/notesoncopyright

“Orphan Works: Statement of Best Practices,” http://www.archivists.org/standards/OWBP-V4.pdf

“Selected Copyright Resources,” http://www2.archivists.org/groups/intellectual-property-working-group/selected-copyright-resources

Association for Recorded Sound Collections, Epperson, Bruce D. “A Circle and a “C”: One Hundred Years of Recorded Music in American Copyright.” Association for Recorded Sound Collections, blog, http://arsc-audio.org/blog/category/copyright/

American Library Association, “Copyright,” http://www.ala.org/advocacy/copyright And all related sub-links: Copyright Tools; Copyright Articles; Copyright Legislation; Court Cases; Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA); Digital Rights Management; Distance Education and the Teach Act; Fair Use; First Sale; General Copyright Google Book Settlement; Intellectual Property; International Copyright; L. Ray Patterson Award; Orphan Works

Association of Research Libraries “Copyright Timeline: A History of Copyright in the United States.” http://www.arl.org/focus-areas/copyright-ip/2486-copyright-timeline#.VMCv5i7F8Xe

Samuels, Edward. The Illustrated Story of Copyright. http://www.edwardsamuels.com/illustratedstory/

5 Georgia Harper (University of Texas). Copyright Crash Course, http://copyright.lib.utexas.edu/index.html

Maher, William J. “Symposium: Digital Archives: Navigating the Legal Shoals: If Only We Could Reach the Shoals: Barriers to Archives Digitization.”

Symposium: Digital Archives, Navigating the Legal Sholes, Columbia University, April 16, 2010 http://web.law.columbia.edu/kernochan/symposia/digital-archives (Articles available through Hein Online)

WEEK 4: DMCA, Sonny Bono, Eldred v. Ashcroft Litman, Digital Copyright, pp. 122–202.

Boynton Robert S. “The Tyranny of Copyright?” New York Times, January 25, 2004, http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/25/magazine/the-tyranny-of-copyright.html

Litman, Jessica. “Fetishizing Copies.” in Copyright in an Age of Limitations and Exceptions, ed. Ruth Okediji (forthcoming, 2015). http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jdlitman/papers/FetishizingCopies.pdf

DMCA: U.S. Copyright Office. Digital Millennium Copyright Act Summary. http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf.

Scan: Digital Millennium Copyright Act, H.R. 2281, 27 January 1998. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-105hr2281enr/pdf/BILLS-105hr2281enr.pdf

Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA) Sonny Bono Copyright Act Scan: Copyright Term Extension (“Sonny Bono Copyright Act”), S.505, 27 January 1998. http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/s505.pdf

Eldred v. Ashcroft, 537 U.S. 186 (2003). http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12147684852241107557&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholar

Lessig, Lawrence. Eldred chapters in Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity, 213–264, http://www.free-culture.cc/freeculture.pdf

WEEK 5: Public Domain and the Commons, International Copyright and Intellectual Property CHART: “Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States,” https://copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm

Chap. 8 in Boyle The Public Domain

Mannapperuma, Menesha A., Brianna L. Schofield, Andrea K. Yankovsky, Lila Bailey, and Jennifer M. Urban. “Is it in the Public Domain?: A Handbook for Evaluating the Copyright Status of a Work Created in the United States between January 1, 1923 And December 31, 1977.” Berkeley Law, May 27, 2014.

Hardin, Garrett. “The Tragedy of the Commons.” Science 162 (1968): 1243–48. http://eesc.columbia.edu/courses/v1003/lectures/population/Tragedy%20of%20the%20Commons.pdf

Creative Commons website http://creativecommons.org/

Lessig, Lawrence. “The .” Montana Law Review 65, No. 1 (2004): 1–14. http://scholarship.law.umt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2304&context=mlr

6

International Copyright and IP Laws Berne Convention (1886) Summary: http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/summary_berne.html Scan/Familiarize: http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/text.jsp?file_id=283698

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) http://www.wipo.int/about-ip/en/ and the following: What is IP? (PDF), Understanding Copyright and Related Rights (PDF), Understanding Industrial Property PDF, WIPO Intellectual Property Handbook - a comprehensive guide to the policy, law and use of IP.

PRESENTATIONS: Each of you will choose a country and discuss their IP/copyright laws in a short presentation (5 or so minutes). The countries to choose from are: Brazil, Canada, China, Cuba, England (UK), France, Germany, India, Mexico, (or a substitute if you have a country in mind).

WEEK 6: Music and Sound Recording Technologies, Part 1: Fundamentals and History Chapters 4 and 5 in Rutter, Paul. The Music Industry Handbook, available online through UT libraries. 70–111.

Chapter 1 in Morton, David. Off the Record: The Technology and Culture of Sound Recording in America (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2000), 13–47. (Available as e-Book through UT Library).

Suisman, Selling Sounds, Chapter 5, “Musical Properties,” (pp. 150–177).

Carroll, Michael W. “The Struggle for Music Copyright.” Working Paper Series. Paper 31, 908–61. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1031&context=wps

Mason, John E. Jr. “Performers Rights and Copyright: The Protection of Sound Recordings from Modern Pirates.” California Law Review 59, No. 2 (March 1971): 548–79. http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/californialawreview/vol59/iss2/5

NPR All Things Considered. “How Much Does It Cost To Make A Hit Song?” http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/07/05/137530847/how-much-does-it-cost-to-make-a-hit-song

WEEK 7: Sound Recording Technologies, Part 2, Pre-1972 Sound Recordings SCAN: “Sound Recording Act of 1971,” Pub. L. No. 92-140, 85 Stat. 391 (1971). http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-85/pdf/STATUTE-85-Pg391.pdf

SCAN: “State Law Texts.” http://www.copyright.gov/docs/sound/20110705_state_law_texts.pdf

Jaszi, Peter, and Nick Lewis. Protection for Pre-1972 Sound Recordings under State Law and Its Impact on Use by Nonprofit Institutions: A 10-State Analysis. CLIR Publication No. 146. Washington, D.C.: Council on Library and Information Resources and Library of Congress, 2009. http://www.loc.gov/rr/record/nrpb/pub146.pdf

Besek, June M. “Copyright and Related Issues Relevant to Digital Preservation and Dissemination of Unpublished Pre-1972 Sound Recordings by Libraries and Archives.” CLIR Publication No. 144. Washington, D.C.: Council on Library and Information Resources and Library of Congress, 2009.

U.S. Copyright Office. “A Study on the Desirability of and Means for Bringing Sound Recordings Fixed Before February 15, 1972, Under Federal Jurisdiction.”

7 http://copyright.gov/docs/sound/

U.S. Copyright Office. Pre-1972 Sound Recordings: A Report of the Register of . Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts, Vol. 37 (2014): December 2011, copyright.gov/docs/sound/pre-72-report.pdf

Subotnik, Eva E. and June M. Besek. “Constitutional Obstacles? Reconsidering Copyright Protection for Pre-1972 Sound Recordings.” http://lawandarts.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2014/07/37.3-Subotnik-Besek-Article-Final.pdf

SPLIT: Brooks, Tim. “How Copyright Law Affects Reissues of Historic Recordings: A New Study.” Association for Recorded Sound Collections (ARSC) Journal 36 (2005): 183–203.

Brooks, Tim. “Only in America: The Unique Status of Sound Recordings under U.S. Copyright Law and How It Threatens Our Audio Heritage.” American Music 27, no. 2 (2009): 125–37.

Brooks, Tim. “Copyright and Historical Sound Recordings: Recent Efforts to Change U.S. Law.” Notes: Quarterly Journal of the Music Library Association 65, No. 3, (2009): 464–74.

Brooks, Tim. “Copyright Issues.” (The next three short writings): http://www.timbrooks.net/copyright-issues/ http://www.timbrooks.net/PDFs/PMS05.pdf http://www.timbrooks.net/PDFs/billboard05.pdf

Brooks, Tim. “Copyright Office—Pre-72 Study Reply Comments.” April 12, 2011. http://www.copyright.gov/docs/sound/comments/reply/041412arsc.pdf

WEEK 8: Spring Break

WEEK 9: Visual Media – Film, Video, Photography

Film “Legal Context,” in National Film Preservation Foundation, The Film Preservation Guide: The Basics for Archives, Libraries, And Museums (San Francisco, CA: National Film Preservation Foundation, 2004), 77–84, http://www.filmpreservation.org/userfiles/image/PDFs/fpg.pdf

Film Stills and Fair Use http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2008/04/23/fair-is-still-fair-and-more-so/ http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.cmstudies.org/resource/resmgr/docs/fairusefilmstills.pdf?hhSearchTerms=%22film+ and+stills%22

Photography Chapter 10, “Legal and Ethical Issues of Ownership, Access, and Usage (pp. 298–349) in Ritzenthaler, Mary Lynn, and Diane Vogt-O’Connor. Photographs: Archival Care and Management. (Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 2006).

Video Familiarize yourself with Sony v. Universal City Studios 464 U.S. 417 (1984). http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5876335373788447272&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholar

American Library Association, ALA Library Fact Sheet #7: Video and Copyright, http://www.ala.org/tools/libfactsheets/alalibraryfactsheet07

First Sale Doctrine and Rentals

8 http://copyrightcodex.com/fair-use-toc/19-limits-exclusive-rights/first-sale-doctrine/

DeCSS software for playing out-of-region DVDs and lawsuit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeCSS – read entry and look at links in references.

YouTube and Copyright: READ: YouTube Copyright and Licensing Language, https://www.youtube.com/yt/copyright/

Visual Artists Rights Act (1990) 17 U.S. Code § 106A: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106A

SPLIT: 17 Cardozo L. Rev. 373 (1995 - 1996) Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990: American Artists Burned Again, The; Sherman, Robert J.

Chang, RayMing. “Revisiting the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990: A Follow-up Survey About Awareness and Waiver.” Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal 13(129).

48 S.M.U. L. Rev. 639 (1994-1995) Artists' Moral Rights: Controversy and the Visual Artists Rights Act; Burton, Dana L.

24 Hofstra L. Rev. 1127 (1995-1996) Visual Artists' Rights Act of 1990: Why Moral Rights Cannot be Protected under the United States Constitution, The; Bensen, Eric E.

8 Am. U. J. Int'l L. & Pol'y 183 (1992-1993) Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990: An Analysis Based on the French Droit Moral, The; Applebaum, Jill R.

15 Hastings Comm. & Ent. L.J. 1003 (1992-1993) Creators Caught in the Middle: Visual Artists Rights Act Preemption of State Moral Rights Law; Brown, Joshua H.

75 UMKC L. Rev. 897 (2006-2007) Mutilating Picasso: The Case for Amending the Visual Artists Rights Act to Provide Protection of Moral Rights after Death; Dillinger, Elizabeth

14 Hastings Comm. & Ent. L.J. 85 (1991-1992) Visual Artists Rights Act, The; Casey, Timothy M.

22 Golden Gate U.L. Rev. 371 (1992) Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990: The Art of Preserving Building Owners' Rights, The; Attlesey, Keith A.

Week 10: Archival and Scholarly Ethics and Repatriation McLeod, Owning Culture, “Chapter 2: Copyright and the Folk Music Tradition,” (pp. 39–70).

Seeger, Anthony. “Traditional Music Ownership in a Commodified World. In Music and Copyright, ed. Frith and Marshall, 157–170, (2004 edition). (Available as an e-Book through UT Library)

Seeger, Anthony. “Ethnomusicologists, Archives, Professional Organizations, and the Shifting Ethics of Intellectual Property.” Yearbook for Traditional Music 28 (1996): 87–105.

SPLIT: Laing, Dave. “Copyright, Politics, and the International Music Industry.” In Music and Copyright, ed. Frith and Marshall, 70–88, (2004 edition).

9 Mitsui, Toru. “Copyright and Music in Japan: A Forced Grafting and Its Consequences.” In Music and Copyright, ed. Frith, 125–45, (1993 edition).

Collins, John. “The Problem of Oral Copyright: The Case of Ghana.” In Music and Copyright, ed. Frith, 146–58, (1993 edition).

Zemp, Hugo. “The/An Ethnomusicologist and the Record Business.” Yearbook for Traditional Music 28 (1996): 36–56.

Mills, Sherylle. “Indigenous Music and the Law: An Analysis of National and International Legislation.” Yearbook for Traditional Music 28 (1996): 57–86.

Seeger, Anthony. “Ethnomusicology and Music Law.” Ethnomusicology, Vol. 36, No. 3, Special Issue: Music and the Public Interest (Autumn, 1992), pp. 345-359. [JSTOR]

Dommann, Monika. “Lost in Tradition?: Reconsidering the History of Folklore and Its Legal Protection Since 1800.” In Intellectual Property and Traditional Cultural Expressions in a Digital Environment. Edited by Christoph Beat Graber and Mira Burri-Nenova, 3–16. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2008.

Lancefield, Robert C. “Musical Traces’ Retraceable Paths: The Repatriation of Recorded Sound.” Journal of Folklore Research 35, no. 1. Special Issue: International Rites (1998): 47–68.

Chaudhuri, Shubha. “Intellectual Property Management in an Ethnomusicology Archive: An Empirical View from India.” Prepared for the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/tk/en/resources/pdf/chaudhuri_report.pdf

Stobart, Henry. “Rampant Reproduction and Digital Democracy: Shifting Landscapes of Music Production and ‘Piracy’ in Bolivia.” Ethnomusicology Forum Vol. 19, No. 1 (2010): 27–56. Henry Stobart

Repatriation (SPLIT): Indiana University, Archives of Traditional Music, “Repatriation.” http://www.indiana.edu/~libarchm/index.php/outreach/repatriation.html

Who Owns Native Culture (book by Michael F. Brown, Harvard UP, 2003) website, “Sources on Indigenous Rights (with emphasis on cultural and intellectual property” http://web.williams.edu/AnthSoc/native/indigrights.htm

International Association of Sound and Audiovisual Archives (IASA), Ethical Principles for Sound and Audiovisual Archives 2010, rev. 2011, http://www.iasa-web.org/ethical-principles

Association for Cultural Equity. “Repatriation Projects.” http://www.culturalequity.org/ace/ce_ace_dissemprogram.php

Fox, Aaron, and Chie Sakakibara. “Bringing the Songs Home: Columbia University Begins Musical Heritage Repatriation Project in the North Slope.” http://music.columbia.edu/cecenter/basc/

Hopi Music Repatriation Project. http://hopimusic.wordpress.com/.

Lyons, Bertram. “Repatriation and Digital Cultural Heritage.” Indian Folklife 37 (2011): 1–3. indianfolklore.org/journals/index.php/IFL/article/download/985/1243.

Russell, Maureen. “Knowledge (or Intangible Cultural Heritage Repatriation).” Ethnomusicology Review. http://ethnomusicologyreview.ucla.edu/content/archives-and-archiving-knowledge-repatriation

10

Week 11: Pop Will Eat Itself: Forensic Musicology and Music Copyright Infringement Beam, Christopher. “What’s a Forensic Musicologist?” Slate, 12 November 2010. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2010/11/whats_a_forensic_musicologist.html.

Begault, Durand R., Heather D. Heise, and Christopher A. Peltier. “Analysis Criteria for Forensic Musicology.” Audio Forensic Center, Charles M. Salter Associates, San Francisco, CA, paper for the International Congress on Acoustics conference, 2–7 June 2013, http://www.audioforensics.com/PDFs/ICA_Musicology2013.pdf Tschider, Charlotte A. “Automating Music Similarity Analysis in “Sound-Alike” Copyright Infringement Cases.” NYSBA Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law Journal, Vol. 25, No. 2 (Summer 2014): 60–68.

Vaidhyanathan, Siva. Chapter 4: “Hep Cats and Copy Cats: American Music Challenges the Copyright Tradition.” In Copyrights and Copywrongs: The Rise of Intellectual Property and How it Threatens Creativity (New York: New York University Press, 2001), 117–148. (Available as e-Book through UT Library)

McLeod, Kembrew, and Peter DiCola. “Non-Infringing Uses in Digital Sampling: The Role of Fair Use and the De Minimis Threshold in Sample Clearance Reform.” 17 Deakin Law Review 17 (2012): 321–334. (PDF through UT Libraries)

FILM: Gaylor, Brett. RiP: A Remix Manifesto (2009) http://vimeo.com/8040182

Strauss, Neil. “POP VIEW; Sampling Is (a) Creative Or (b) Theft?” New York Times, September 14, 1997.

Split: “Creedence Clearwater Members Sue John Fogerty Over Use of Band's Name.” The Hollywood Reporter, December 8, 2014, http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/creedence-clearwater-members-sue-john-754817

Gardner, Eriq. “Jay Z Faces Sound Engineer's Bold Claim Over Song Rights.” Hollywood Reporter, July 9, 2014. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/jay-z-faces-sound-engineers-717385

Gardner, Eriq. “Lawsuit Explores Who Owns Rights to a Stax Records Musical.” Hollywood Reporter, August 12, 2014. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/lawsuit-explores-who-owns-rights-724691

Kozinn, Alan. “Rare Dylan Recordings Set for Release in Copyright Extension Bid.” New York Times, December 5, 2014, http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/12/05/rare-dylan-recordings-set-for-release-in-copyright-extension- bid/?_r=0

Lifton, Dave. “Beatles Releasing Rarities Album to Fight Copyright Laws.” Ultimate Classic Rock, December 14, 2013. http://ultimateclassicrock.com/beatles-rarities-copyright-laws/ Menand, Louis. “Crooner in Rights Spat: Are copyright laws too strict?” The New Yorker, October 20, 2014.

Masnick, Mike. Blurred Lines Copyright Lawsuit Gets Funky As Judge Delves Into The Blurred Lines Of What’s Really Copyrighted.” TechDirt, 2 February 2015, https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150201/07020329869/blurred-lines-copyright-lawsuit-gets-funky-as-judge- delves-into-blurred-lines-whats-really-copyrighted.shtml

“Read More: Beatles Releasing Rarities Album to Fight Copyright Laws,” http://ultimateclassicrock.com/beatles- rarities-copyright-laws/?trackback=tsmclip

Sisario, Ben. “In Battles, Lyrics Demand Respect Too.” New York Times, November 11, 2013. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/12/business/media/in-music-piracy-battles-lyrics-demand-respect- too.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=nytimesarts&_r=0

11 Weiser, Benjamin. “Birthday Song’s Copyright Leads to a Lawsuit for the Ages.” New York Times, June 13, 2013. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/14/nyregion/lawsuit-aims-to-strip-happy-birthday-to-you-of-its- copyright.html?smid=fb-nytimes&WT.z_sma=NY_BSC_20130614&_r=0

WEEK 11: Pop Will Eat Itself, Part 2: Sampling and “Remix Culture” Chapter 6 in Boyle, The Public Domain.

Sewell, Amanda. “How Copyright Affected the Musical Style and Critical Reception of Sample-Based Hip-Hop.” Journal of Popular Music Studies, Vol. 26, Nos. 2–3 (2014): 295–320.

McLeod, Kembrew. “Confessions of an Intellectual (Property): Danger Mouse, Mickey Mouse, Sonny Bono, and My Long and Winding Path as a Copyright Activist.” Popular Music and Society, Vol. 28, No. 1 (2005): 79–93. (PDF through UT Libraries)

FILM: McLeod, Kimbrew, dir. Copyright Criminals, (about film): http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/copyright-criminals/ (the film): http://vimeo.com/9958864 (and here): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIoR3PYpduo

Context/Scan: Albini, Steve. “The Problem With Music.” The Baffler, 5 (1994), http://www.thebaffler.com/salvos/the-problem- with-music

“Steve Albini vs GQ vs remix culture vs copyright criminals.” Oct 12, 2010. http://freemusicarchive.org/forum/Music/47

Said, Amir. “Copyright Criminals Comes Up Short.” BeatTips, January 20, 2010. http://www.beattips.com/beattips/2010/01/copyright-criminals-comes-up-short.html

Presentation: Choose a case from the Music Copyright Infringement Resource, University of Southern California: mcir.usc.edu/ and prepare a short presentation with musical examples.

WEEK 12: Legal Public Distributions of Music; Radio and the Streaming Music/Music Licensing Debate Coase, R. H. “Payola in Radio and Television Broadcasting.” Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 22, No. 2 (Oct., 1979), pp. 269–328.

Klein, Bethany. “‘The New Radio’: Music Licensing As A Response To Industry Woe.” Media, Culture, and Society 30/4 (2008): 463–78.

U.S. Copyright Office. “Music Licensing Study.” http://copyright.gov/docs/musiclicensingstudy/

“SoundExchange v. Sirius Satellite Radio.” http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1785917483950186554&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholar

“Flo and Eddie v. Sirius Satellite Radio.” http://www.soundexchange.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/2014-11-14- Order-on-Summary-Judgment-Flo-and-Eddie-v-Sirius-XM-SDNY.pdf

Albini, Steve. Face the Music Keynote Address; Melbourne, Australia, November 2014 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lz_CPzuwSk4 [Transcript]: “Steve Albini on the surprisingly sturdy state of the music industry – in full.” The Guardian, November 16, 2014, http://www.theguardian.com/music/2014/nov/17/steve-albinis-keynote-address-at-face-the-music-in-full

12 Summary: “Steve Albini Says Many of Music's Problems Have Been Solved, Addresses That ‘Purple Dwarf in Assless Chaps.’” Billboard, November 17, 2014, http://www.billboard.com/articles/business/6319864/steve-albini- digital-music-intellectual-property-problem-with-music

SPLIT: Richardson, Mark. “Three Points Missing From the Streaming Media Debate.” Pitchfork, December 2, 2014, http://pitchfork.com/thepitch/577-three-points-missing-from-the-streaming-media-debate/

McMillan, Graeme. “Is Pandora Really Short-Changing Songwriters?” Wired, July 13, 2013. http://www.wired.com/2013/07/david-lowery-pandora/

Timberg, Scott. “David Lowery: Here’s how Pandora is destroying musicians,” Salon, August 31, 2014, http://www.salon.com/2014/08/31/david_lowery_heres_how_pandora_is_destroying_musicians/

“Pandora Users Played David Lowery's Song a Million Times and All He Got Was $16.89.” Spin, June 24, 2013, http://www.spin.com/articles/pandora-david-lowery-cracker-low-royalties-debate-streaming/

Yardley, Miranda. “Projekt Records’ Sam Rosenthal on Spotify and digital distribution.” Terrorizer, October 27, 2011, http://www.terrorizer.com/dominion/dominionfeatures/projekt-records-sam-rosenthal-on-spotify-and-digital- distribution-1/

Farmelo, Allen. “On Spotify (And Why I'm Not A Conspiracy Theorist After All).” TapeOp (Tape Log #21) http://www.tapeop.com/blog/2015/01/14/why-and-how-spotify-managed-get-such-low-royalty-r/

“‘Radio’ and Artist Compensation: A Study in Contrasts.” Future of Music Coalition, November 8, 2014, https://futureofmusic.org/blog/2014/11/08/%E2%80%9Cradio%E2%80%9D-and-artist-compensation-study- contrasts

Israelite, David. “Guest Post: Dept. of Justice Consent Decree Comments Reveal Real Friends, Foes of Songwriters.” Billboard, September 9, 2014, http://www.billboard.com/articles/business/6244088/david-israelite- doj-consent-decree-songwriter-compensation

Various: Current articles on U.S. Copyright Office’s Music Licensing Study

WEEK 13: Not-So-Legal Distribution of Music; Piracy, Bootlegging, and Torrenting, Part 1 Vaidhyanathan, Siva. “Why Thomas Jefferson Would Love Napster.” MSNBC.com. 3 July 2001. http://elastico.net/copyfight/upload/siva_jefferson.pdf

Burkart, Patrick. “Music in the Cloud and the Digital Sublime.” Popular Music and Society, Vol. 37, No. 4 (2014): 393–407.

Marshall, Lee. “Infringers.” In Music and Copyright, 2nd. ed., ed. Simon Frith and Lee Marshall (New York: Routledge, 2004). Available as e-Book through UT Library.

McLeod, Kembrew. “MP3s Are Killing Home Taping: The Rise of Distribution and Its Challenge to the Major Label Music Monopoly.” Popular Music and Society, Vol. 28, No. 4 (2005): 521–31. (PDF through UT Library)

Film: Winter, Alex, director. Downloaded. VH1 Rock Docs, Trouper Productions, 2012. http://on.aol.com/video/downloaded---full-documentary-film-517844258.

NAPSTER: A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004 (2001), http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/239_F3d_1004.htm.

13 SPLIT: Raymond Shih Ray Ku, “The Creative Destruction of Copyright: Napster and the New Economics of Digital Technology,” The University of Chicago Law Review Vol. 69, No. 1 (Winter, 2002), pp. 263-324 [JSTOR]

McCourt, Tom, and Patrick Burkart, “When Creators, Corporations and Consumers Collide: Napster and the Development of On-line Music Distribution,” Media Culture Society vol. 25 no. 3 (2003): 333–50.

Giesler, Markus, and Mali Pohlmann. “The Anthropology Of : Consuming Napster As A Gift.” Advances in consumer research 30 (2003): 273–79.

63 Ohio St. L.J. 799 (2002) Napster Opens Pandora's Box: Examining How File-Sharing Services Threaten the Enforcement of Copyright on the Internet; Green, Matthew

37 Creighton L. Rev. 859 (2003-2004) Is Betamax Obsolete: Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. in the Age of Napster; Feder, Jesse M.

52 Hastings L.J. 939 (2000-2001) Is Napster a VCR--The Implications of Sony for Napster and Other Internet Technologies; Dogan, Stacey L.

Spitza, David, Starling D. Huntera. “Contested Codes: The Social Construction of Napster.” The Information Society: An International Journal Volume 21, Issue 3, 2005

18 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 755 (1999-2000) RIAA v. Napster: A Window onto the Future of Copyright Law in the Internet Age; Berschadsky, Ariel

Week 14: Not-So-Legal Distribution of Music; Piracy, Bootlegging, and Torrenting, Part 2 FILM: Christensen, Ralf, Andreas Johnsen, Henrik Moltke, dirs. Good Copy, Bad Copy (2007) http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/good-copy-bad-copy/

GROKSTER: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Inc., et al. v. Grokster, Ltd., et al. 545 U.S. 913 (2005). http://www.copyright.gov/docs/mgm/.

SPLIT: Zepeda, Lisa M. “A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc.” Berkeley Technology Law Journal 17, No. 1 (2014): 71–90. http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1341&context=btlj

Berkeley Technology Law Journal, Metro-Goldwyn-Meyer Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, LTD. - Brief of Amici Curiae Sixty Intellectual Property and Technology Law Professors and the United States Public Policy Committee of the Association for Computing Machinery in Support of Respondents, 20 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 535 (2005): 547–59. http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/btlj/vol20/iss1/50.

Pamela Samuelson, Three Reactions to MGM v. Grokster, 13 Mich. Telecomm. & Tech. L. Rev. 177 (2006):177–96. http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/facpubs/141.

Galen Hancock, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd.: Inducing Infringement and Secondary Copyright Liability, 21 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 189 (2006): 189–212. http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/btlj/vol21/iss1/18.

Andrew J. Lee, MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd. & In re Aimster Litigation: A Study of Secondary Copyright Liability in the Peer-to-Peer Context, 20 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 485 (2005): 485– 508. http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/btlj/vol20/iss1/47.

Elizabeth Miles, In re Aimster & MGM, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd.: Peer-to-Peer and the Sony Doctrine, 19 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 21 (2004): 21–57. http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/btlj/vol19/iss1/3.

14

19 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 393 (2005-2006) Grokster Dead-End, The; Choi, Bryan H.

Yen, Alfred C. “Third Party Copyright Liability after Grokster.” Minnesota Law Review, Vol. 91, No. 1 (2006): 184–240.

53 Buff. L. Rev. 141 (2005-2006) From Sony to Grokster, the Failure of the Copyright Doctrines of Contributory Infringement and Vicarious Liability to Resolve the War between Content and Destructive Technologies; Grossman, Craig A.

WEEK 15: Other Media and Copyright Born Digital/Social Media National Archives and Records Administration. “White Paper on Best Practices for the Capture of Social Media Records (May 2013).” http://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/resources/socialmediacapture.pdf

Harrison, Andrew, and Stephen N. Harris. “Listening To Storage: Listening tests reveal significant sound quality differences between various digital music storage technologies.” Hi-Fi Critic Vol. 5, No. 3, http://www.enjoythemusic.com/hificritic/vol5_no3/listening_to_storage.htm

Burkhart, Patrick. “Trends in Digital Music Archiving.” The Information Society: An International Journal, Vol. 24, No. 4, 246–250.

Hyde, Bob. “The First Sale Doctrine and Digital Phonorecords.” Duke Law & Technology Review 1 (2001): 1–9.

Zimmerman, Diane Leenheer. “Can Our Culture Be Saved-The Future of Digital Archiving.” Minnesota Law Review 91 (2006): 989–1046. http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Zimmerman_Final.pdf

Besek, June M. “Digital Preservation and Copyright.” WIPO Magazine, September 2008. http://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2008/05/article_0010.html

MOOCs Fowler, Lauren, and Kevin Smith. “Drawing the Blueprint As We Build: Setting Up a Library-based Copyright and Permissions Service for MOOCs.” D-Lib Magazine, Vol. 19, nos. 7–8 (July–August 2013), http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july13/fowler/07fowler.html

Apple, iTunes, DRM

Chen Brian X. “iPod Lawsuit Down to One Plaintiff.” New York Times, December 5, 2014.

“Apple 'deleted' rivals' music from iPods, court hears.” BBC News – Technology, http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-30328309

Lowensohn, Josh. “Apple's Eddy Cue explains why DRM for music was a necessary evil.” The Verge, http://www.theverge.com/2014/12/4/7326505/Apples-Eddy-Cue-on-DRM

Singleton, Micah. “Apple is just now going to trial over the music DRM it killed in 2009.” http://www.theverge.com/2014/12/2/7315631/Apples-music-DRM-dead-for-over-five-years-is-now-on-trial

Oral History Rubel, Dejah T. “Accessing Their Voice from Anywhere: Analysis of the Legal Issues Surrounding the Online Use of Oral Histories.” Archival Issues Vol. 31, No. 2 (2007), pp. 171–87.

15 Larson, Mary. “Steering Clear of the Rocks: A Look at the Current State of Oral History Ethics in the Digital Age.” Oral History Review Vol. 40, no. 1 (2013): 36–49.

Cohen, Steve. “Shifting Questions: New Paradigms for Oral History in a Digital World.” Oral History Review Vol. 40, no. 1 (2013): 154–67.

Stephenson, Shirley E. “Protect Your Collection: Oral History and Copyright.” The Public Historian, Vol. 9, No. 4 (Autumn 1987): 20–33.

Swain, Ellen D. “Oral History in the Archives: Its Documentary Role in the Twenty-first Century.” American Archivist, Vol. 66 (Spring–Summer 2003): 139–158.

Online Oral Histories to Browse: Oral History Online (George Washington University index of oral history sites), http://historymatters.gmu.edu/mse/oral/online.html

Baylor University, Archiving Oral Histories, http://www.baylor.edu/content/services/document.php/79807.pdf

Smithsonian, “Use of Audio Excerpts from Oral History Interviews,” http://www.aaa.si.edu/askus/recordings

Tarlton Law Library Oral History Series, http://tarlton.law.utexas.edu/special-collections/oral-history

Civil Rights Movement in Kentucky Oral History Project, http://history.ky.gov/portfolio/civil-rights-movement-in- kentucky-oral-history-project/

16