Earlier this year, there was another skirmish in the long running battle over copyright in recipes. The intriguingly titled case of Tomaydo-Tomahhdo, LLC v. Vozary once again examined the question of: are recipes copyrightable? And if so, what parts? Nova Southeastern University's Copyright Officer, Stephen Carlisle, J.D., takes a look at the law and the cases that arise when someone gets caught with their hands in the recipe cookie jar.
The verdict in the “Blurred Lines” case surprised a lot of people. Many failed to see the level of similarity that the jury did, and felt the case set a bad precedent going forward. Nova Southeastern University's Copyright Officer, Stephen Carlisle, J.D., examines the component parts of the two songs, takes a look at the expert testimony, and explains what it means for music, now and in the future.
Two more copyright myths bit the dust this week, though it is doubtless that they will continue to be repeated. The first is the persistent myth of the $150,000 statutory damages award. The second is the myth of the DMCA takedown notice as the enemy of free speech. Nova Southeastern University's Copyright Officer, Stephen Carlisle, J.D., uncovers the facts behind the fictions.
A recent law review article shows how copyright piracy is a major source of funds for terrorists. Also in the news is that Google for the first time reports that in 2014 they took down over 180 million videos from YouTube. Nova Southeastern University's Copyright Officer, Stephen Carlisle, J.D., digs into the facts and offers more insight.
It has become very fashionable to insist that copyrights be pushed into the public domain absolutely as soon as possible. This way, the argument goes, they can be copied and built upon by others. Nova Southeastern University's Copyright Officer, Stephen Carlisle, J.D., asks, since when did copying become creativity? He breaks down the arguments and shows how not only does the premise not hold up, but creative restrictions in fact encourage rather than inhibit creativity.
On February 5, 2015, the Copyright Office dropped its long awaited report on Music Licensing and its recommendations of the changes to be made to the system. At 202 pages, 45 pages of exhibits and 975 footnotes, it’s a lot to digest, but Nova Southeastern University's Copyright Officer, Stephen Carlisle J.D., has done the heavy lifting for you. He outlines the major proposed changes with an eye on whether Congress might enact the changes, and whether the changes go far enough.
Updating previous blog posts, this week, Nova Southeastern University's Copyright Officer looks at how Malibu Media lost their first summary judgement motion and court ruling that “transformative use” artists assume the risk of a lawsuit.
The recent court case over the song “Blurred Lines” highlighted a very thorny question: exactly what parts of a song are copyrightable? Nova Southeastern University's Copyright Officer, Stephen Carlisle, J.D., explains how courts have handled the questions legally, and how music composition techniques and music theory affect the results.
This blog edition updates some topics covered in previous blog posts: Google is caught once again abusing its DMCA safe harbor rights, Canadian publisher announces a series of new James Bond stories, and a Judge rules that two copyrights that are infringed are actually only one copyright infringed. Nova Southeastern University's Copyright Officer, Stephen Carlisle, J.D., keeps you up to date and explains what it all means.
Many arguments being tossed about on the internet are sheer sophistry; namely “the deliberate use of a false argument with the intent to trick someone.” Foremost amongst these are the claims of the anti-copyright forces of such curious notions that “copyrights are not property” and “copyright infringement is not theft.” Nova Southeastern University's Copyright Officer, Stephen Carlisle, J.D., examines these assertions and discovers that sometimes the answer is hiding in plain sight.
Get in touch with the NSU Copyright Officer