Litigation Attorneys

A private equity company that was ready, the funding of SCO’s reorganization is now second thoughts. According to a memorandum of understanding has been shown to the public in February, Steve Norris Capital Partners (SNKP) announced on a provisional basis, to buy $ 5 million in shares and a credit of $ 95 million for the payment of creditors and society. SNKP has now acquired and the project, rather than negotiate a surrender, for which the assets of SCO.

SCO is one of the instigators of getting the most grotesque and moral battles in the history of the software industry. Utah UNIX-based, the manufacturer claims that in the possession of the original UNIX SVRX and copyrights, the open source OS Linux contains millions of lines of code that had been misappropriated from UNIX . Within the resulting disputes trainwreck, it has become clear that SCO knew from the start that she had never in possession of copyrights and that its tests are not evidence of a violation of code into Linux.

As a result of the granting of a legal regulation which explains why Novell was the true copyright holder SVRX, SCO action collapsed. The judge also pointed out that 95 percent of royalties that SVRX SCO, the company that gave its only profitable years in history, were in fact caused by Novell.

SNKP original plans when the company came as a surprise, given that SCO has virtually lost none of its value. As we pointed out in our previous proposal for the coverage of SNKP, SCO UnixWare’s flagship product has not yet seen a new version to four years, and acknowledges that SCO UnixWare revenue suffered a massive decline during this period, Following the competition from Linux. SNKP have finally figured this out, and it is now a step backwards to the origin proposed by Deal.

Novell has been increasingly eager to SCO’s stupidity during the bankruptcy proceedings. The end of last month, Novell had objected to SCO’s York, the demand for return of capital for the care in the context of the elaboration of an agreement, which has never been done Buyout. Novell’s notification indicates that the demand for SCO’s “the worst and least-supported idea” and “does not reflect the reasonable assessment completed, but a total lack of judgement in a while.” Novell, described the negotiations with SCO York as “just a really bad deal, they chased and relentless pursuit of their dreams of a dispute stroke of luck.”

Realizing that this was SCO’s third attempt, reorganization, a lawyer with the Department of Justice’s program representative said that the judges of the bankruptcy, the DoJ to lose patience, and that may require undertaking are sent to an independent agent, reducing If SNKP Deal falls.

SEOUL, April 3 (Reuters) - KT Corp. (030200.KS: Quote, Profile, Research), South Korea’s dominant fixed-line and broadband operators, said Wednesday that he was accompanied Japanese telecommunications and Internet, the group Soft Bank (9984. T: Quote, Profile, Research), and invest in new media.

KT and the Softbank group initially invest 20 billion won ($ 20.5 million), each of the new funds that focus on the development of new and the content security. KT plans to inject more than 23 billion won in securing media content.

KT, 91 per cent of South Korea, the fixed network and 45 percent of the broadband market, the clientele is looking for future gains in the Internet Protocol TV, television and interactive services to large band.

KT said that the new funds are managed by Softbank ventures in Korea, participation in the funding of education and entertainment programming and to safeguard their commercial rights, onto the Internet and Mobile TV.

KT shares closed 1.8 percent, only a better result from the broader market, 1.2%.

KT faces increasing competition as SK Telecom (017670.KS: Quote, Profile, Research), the country early mobile operators, which recently control of rival broadband and IPTV provider hanarotelecom (033630.KQ: Quote , Profile, Research).

KT was the victim in January a decrease of 30 percent in the first quarter, due to higher earnings marketing costs.

Softbank, Japan, operates No. 3 mobile operators, also has stakes in Yahoo Inc. (YHOO.O: Quote, Profile, Research) and Yahoo Japan (4689.T: Quote, Profile, Research). ($ 1 = 974.3) (Won Reporting by Marie-France Han; Editing Keiron Henderson)

The Section 108 Study Group has its long-awaited report. The variety 19-2005 inform statutory changes to update the Copyright Act’s exception for libraries and archives in the digital era, but we do not always see how fast, or whether the group has carefully recommended are increasingly being air-conditioned, in national legislation. Summer in the Librarian of Congress James Billington, and the list of copyrights, Marybeth Peters, this week, and are intended for “a basis of the legislation could be developed and recommended Congress.” Overall, the report reflects the hard work and debates on a number of issues related to libraries and copyright, but also deep and persistent tensions between publishers and libraries in the digital age.

It is interesting to note that the report recommends the exception of Article 108 could be strengthened, for museums, which are currently ineligible. That is the only recommendation clear and unambiguous in the report. Other languages are widely that can be interpreted by many legislators. For example, the report proposes that Article 108 of the “copy of the” rule of three, libraries allows up to three copies of a work published replacement at the end of life are amended to “a number limited copies, as is reasonably necessary “to create and maintain” One copy of the substitute. ” That is also conditioned, but the determination of a library as a replacement of the copy is not available at a “fair price”, and a confirmation that “perhaps there circumstances in which copy of a work license as a Qualified Copy available at a fair price. ”

Preservation was perhaps the major theme in the report, but once again, the great traits to leave a lot of room for legislators. The group reached an agreement that libraries and museums should be able to create copies of “risk”, but suggested that the commitment to limit these copies to a “certain” necessary “, the number of copies , but also “access” to “desk copies.” Recommendation enumerate a laundry list of qualifications to be fulfilled before the definition, institutions have the opportunity to offload this exception and a vague recommendation to “make abatements for institutions with limited resources, which are not themselves Preservation sophisticated systems.

The online archive
Another important question relates to libraries to acquire the ability of “public service of the spread of online content, including Internet sites.” The group recommends that libraries can archive and make this content for Web sites that are not only controls access, such as passwords, but also a case of “opt-out “for rights holders, except for the Library of Congress, the possibility of covering this type of content, irrespective of the owner of the desire to unsubscribe. In addition, libraries are prohibited from participation in all activities likely to significantly affect the value of the activity or the website of the line hosting content. ”

The recommendations in the report, “reflected the agreement of all participants,” the grouping, although it admits, “this agreement is often based on the satisfactory solution on the outstanding issues.” The report, now a number of issues, but that the group could not reach an agreement, the most prominent digital pay (ILL). The group acknowledged that “the mere restriction of the copy of a copy” ILL “is replaced by a more flexible standard,” but no specific instruction.

An action plan aims recently announced the beginning of the end for illegal software in Turkey.

The plan, entitled To Start button, the objective of the education sector and justice in an attempt to reduce the trade in pirated software, which is 64 percent of the Turkish part of $ 1 billion of the software industry.

Education, culture and the ministries of justice, the development of new rules on software piracy as part of this effort, including the assumption of a number of non-governmental organizations . As part of its commitment to eradicate software piracy in Turkey, the Turkish government has recently begun sending judges and prosecutors from the United States for specific training in order for justice to a large number of software pirated in litigation over the past few years.

Four prosecutors, upon arrival in the United States last month, verified cases of intellectual property and learned directly by copyright experts. The workload is already causing nightmares for the manufacturers of pirated software. Some believe, software pirates are encouraged by the fact that the case of Turkey as a general rule a prescription. The new “action plan” for the three departments aims to put an end to this practice. Similarly, the curriculum in place, with courses on “copyright” for students. The goal is to make students and young people in general, aware of the concept of intellectual property rights, including copyright.

Copyright adequate and comprehensive, but also cases in the last five years in Turkey:

Software piracy is a serious problem in Turkey. Nearly 64 percent of the whole sector of the software is illegal. According to a report published in January this year by the International Data Corporation (IDC), Turkey is a country in which the production of software raubkopierter is widespread. The report notes that even a reduction of 10 percent can be achieved in a number of measures against the illegal exploitation of the software market, which is characterized by criminal organizations, and this could major contributions to the economy of Turkey.

Such a reduction of pirated software in the market could lead to what the gross domestic product (GDP) to increase by $ 625 million to the increase in tax revenue of $ 80 million the United States, and employment increased by nearly 36000 people between 2009 and 2011, IDC’s report said.

The importance of intellectual property rights and copyright in the software industry has been fully developed at the ministerial level during the last few years. Between 2002 and 2003, the Ministry of Justice a total of eight judges, specialized courts, the United States for training in 10 months of a program on copyright. The ministry now sends prosecutors to participate in the program.

The Business Software Alliance (BSA), composed of Microsoft, Apple and Adobe, a pioneer in the world of brands software industry is working with government departments and to the fight against software piracy. Elçim Barkay, Turkey, coordinator of the BSA and Microsoft’s copyrights Manager Turkey, said they were in close contact with the ministries involved in the preparation of the action plan. “We must rapidly in the legal provisions in the context of pirated software, because if the existing laws in this regard are very reasonable and net, the more often the case before a limitation period, and thereafter at judgments, sometimes five years after the fall ago justice, “said Barkay. “In such cases, a statute, a trial must be regarded as prescribed. On this point, equally important is the training of judges and lawyers, which, in general, insufficient information about substance and intellectual property and copyright. The Department of Justice has a large expense about that. What we are trying to do is money flowing block of pirated software products. “Training does is not just about four prosecutors, “said Barkay.

One of Turkey, most of the intellectual property rights, eminent experts, the lawyer, Dr. Cahit Suluk, on the other side, so that the adoption of laws on intellectual property during the year 1995 was a “first” to Turkey. Suluk stressed that these laws were adopted in conformity with the TRIPS Agreement, with the customs union and the World Trade Organization, as well as more advanced that are already exciting in many Western countries. “Turkish legislation in the area of intellectual property and copyright are very reasonable and complete, but we have problems in practice. A case can even during the past five years. And, in most cases, are dismissed as a result of cases, statutes, restrictions, “he said.

The Section 108 Study Group has delivered its long-awaited report. The diverse 19-member panel was chartered in 2005 to inform legislative changes to update the Copyright Act’s exception for libraries and archives for the digital age, but it remains unclear how quickly, or if, the group’s carefully-worded, conditioned recommendations will ever make it into law. The were delivered to the Librarian of Congress, James Billington, and the Register of Copyrights, MaryBeth Peters, this week, and are intended to “provide a basis on which legislation could be drafted and recommended to Congress.” Overall, the report reflects significant work and discussion on a range of issues relating to libraries and copyright-but also deep, ongoing tension between publishers and libraries in the digital age.

Notably, the report recommended the Section 108 exception be extended to museums, which are currently ineligible. That, however, represents the only clear, unambiguous recommendation in the report. The others include broad language that could be interpreted many ways by legislators. For example, the report suggests Section 108’s “three copy rule,” which permits libraries make up to three copies of a published work for replacement purposes, be amended to allow “a limited number of copies as reasonably necessary” to create and maintain “a single replacement copy.” That point is further conditioned, however, on a library determining that a replacement copy is not available at a “fair price,” and an acknowledgement that “there may be circumstances under which a licensed copy of a work qualifies as a copy obtainable at a fair price.”

Preservation was perhaps the major issue addressed in the report, but once again, the broad strokes leave significant latitude for legislators. The group agreed that libraries and museums should be able to make copies of “at risk” works, but suggested conditioning that upon limiting those copies to a “reasonably necessary” number of copies, as well as “restricting access” to the “preservation copies.” That recommendation also enumerate a laundry list of qualifications to be met before even determining which institutions can avail themselves of this exception-and include a vague recommendation to “make allowances for institutions with limited resources that cannot create their own sophisticated preservation systems.”

Archiving online
Another major issue concerned libraries’ ability to capture “publicly disseminated online content, including web sites.” The group recommended that libraries be allowed to archive and make this content available for sites that are not restricted by access controls, such as passwords, but also should offer an “opt-out” for rights holders-except for the Library of Congress, which is to be allowed to capture such content regardless of the owner’s desire to opt out. In addition, libraries are to be prohibited from “engaging in any activities that are likely to materially harm the value or operations of the Internet site hosting the online content.”

The recommendations issued in the report, “reflect agreement of all participants,” the executive summary notes, although it concedes “agreement is often conditioned on satisfactory resolution of relating outstanding issues.” The report, meanwhile, listed a number of issues the group considered but could not agree on-most prominently, digital Interlibrary Loan (ILL). The group acknowledged that “the single-copy restriction on copying” for ILL be “replaced with a more flexible standard” but offered no specific guidance.

Four Virginia and Arizona High Schools students hope visitors on a legal Turnitin was rejected: a federal district judge in Virginia has recently threw his appeal, which ruled that the detection of counterfeits is not contrary to copyright on students, while it is storing digital copies tip to consider their proposals for the future of academic dishonesty.

The suit began in October 2006, when students belonging to a self-described as the “Committee for Students’ Rights” in the McLean High School in Virginia argued that, if the parent company of Turnitin, iParadigms, which he has maintained his work in databases, in practice against copyright.

“The objection is that Turnitin.com is an amount of money from the database,” said Leo Brett McLean student in the year 2006. “Database is the only element. In the absence of the database, it is just a search engine. That is why they need our papers, of the database. And they enjoy it. ”

Teachers who Turnitin, you can determine whether a student plagiarism of his paper but you online. The service is initiated by the paper, the database houses millions of students, previous work and the Internet based on the scientific and commercial. An “originality report” is then issued. If teachers and students of the educational institution approved Turnitin adds the student paper at its digital archives.

In his opinion, Judge Claude Hilton of the Eastern District of Virginia, agreed that “fair use” was not injured because in the federal law, the unauthorized use of work protected by copyright for purposes such as education, science and research “is not an infringement of copyright.” Frequently draw limited use of material protected by copyright without the permission of copyright holders.

The judge also, the students say they have been forced to continue working on Turnitin rules of the school. “Schools have the right to decide how to monitor and address plagiarism in their schools and in May, the companies employ to help as iParadigms,” he writes. “When the Supreme Court recognized in the constitutional framework”, the rights of the students at the school are not automatically coextensive with the rights of adults in other settings “and” the rights of students should, considering special characteristics of the environment Schulischen.

These days, it is quite common for people have their own blogs and / or web sites. Some people want to make sure their ideas online are protected.

“It’s an interesting question, because the author is free, and what you really talk to a recording of your work of the author,” says copyright lawyer Omaha Adam Jacobs. “It has nothing to do with a registration with the agency copyrights, the United States copyright.”

Jacobs believes it is important that you first need to know what a copyright.

“Every work of the author,” says Jacobs. “Everything, where a certain degree of change in a tangible medium, it might be a work of authorship, copyright protects”.

The examples are common paintings, sculptures, books and poetry. Whenever you create a work, you automatically copyrights.

“What Not to enforce rights are protected by copyright,” says Jacobs. “She was unable to stop someone and to copy, without your permission, until you have a registration with of the US Copyright Office. ”

It is relatively simple request. This brings us to copyrights online.

“The free online access, copyright, which would serve as a high-tech version of himself mailing a letter,” says Jacobs. “Well, it is only evidence, the date of the author and the fact that it was a writer at a certain job.

Jacob’s ladder, told someone not to bring an order online copyright, but it can be useful, especially for the nature of modern work.

“I think the page is at the forefront of Blogger or for people, changes in its website very often,” says Jacobs. “It is anticipated that the updated version to them, and then, when it was necessary to implement this right, you can use the file, and increasingly for copyrights in the United States later the application that work. ”

If you myfreecopyright.com, they appreciate your fingerprint. There is no reason to worry about identity theft, because it is not seeking a fingerprint of your workforce, but an identification code on your copyright.

Copyright law should be amended to make it easier for libraries and archives to the preservation of online content without laws of copyright, according to a report released this month by a group of lawyers, Publishers and librarians. The “Section 108 Study Group Report,” is a model for the action of the United States Congress. Article 108 is a provision of the law of copyright, a copy of content protected by copyright for archiving.

Among the findings of the report: Section 108 should be revised so that libraries and archives can be duplicated online, and the collection of materials and make available to scientists and researchers. But change will be publicly available on the content, not the content from the walls of the general use. And the copyright owner archivists could require that their equipment did not reproduce, on the condition that the material is not by the government or by a political site.

One set of heirs to the originator of the Superman character have been awarded copyrights back following the completion of a contract that ended in 1999 from the original sale in 1938. Time Warner, who have been exercising the rights and profiting from them, have been ordered to “share” by a federal judge, at least for the domestic copyrights. No royalties have been awarded yet.
..”"After 70 years, Jerome Siegel’s heirs regain what he granted so long ago — the copyright in the Superman material that was published in Action Comics,” Larson wrote in his order Wednesday. The victory was “no small feat indeed,” he said.”….more, certainly not faster than a speeding bullet, there

Depending on which side of the fence you are to rest, anti-plagiarism Turnitin company is known or famous.

In Canada, a year ago, two students claimed that it violates the law on copyright, and he for almost 1 million damages.

But in the United States, a federal judge has decided not students against copyright, although it is storing digital copies of their tours in the database, which the company uses to work on Scientific Dishonesty , “says the Chronicle of Higher Education.

On the contrary, Mr. Judge Claude Hilton decided to digitize documents to find plagiarism was “very transformative,” falls under the “fair use the copyright regime.

“He decided that the company” does not authorize the use of any work, in particular, the creator or the expressive content of the reduction in the use of comparison with other works, and that the new service offers a major public, “says the story, including the floor

“The decision also has consequences for others to the expansion of digital services, such as Google, for example, for books in major bookstores and paste them in the index for the search.

But, “I certainly attractive,” the chronicle of Robert A. quoted Vanderhye, a retired lawyer from Virginia, took, the number of students per bonom case, of course.

“I am confident that the court of appeal for the opposite,” the fair use.

The judge, he said, “copy” of the company shortly.

“He did not even believe that our arguments.”

Tips PaisteUser us a report from Ars Technica discuss how 28.8% of falling Vista, over a period of 2007 were a mistake NVIDIA drivers. The information comes from 158 pages of Microsoft, e-mails sent directly to the request of a judge in Vista compatible appeal. NVIDIA has already there is a class action on the pilot project. From Ars Technica:
“NVIDIA has had serious problems when it came, the time of its magnificent transition G80 new architecture of Windows XP to Windows Vista. Company of the first G80-compatible drivers Vista ended up delayed from December to the end of January , and even then Was only available as beta download. In this case, the full compatibility and stability do not come quickly, and the Internet is scattered reports of problems related to pilot the use of G80 processors for the entire l year 2007. It has always been a Question is whether the problem was not really so bad, or whether the report was prejudices paint a negative image of the current situation, that this is really happening. “

LOS ANGELES, CA - (Market Wire - March 26, 2008) - LegalZoom.com nation on key legal documents online services announced today that it has chosen the Rogers group as public relations agency of record a research agency.

Legal Zoom provides consumers and small business owners with a practical and economic common mode in mind the legal requirements, like the last time, wants to live, hospitality, education LLC, trademarks, copyrights and patents. Customers answer a series of simple questions in a secure online environment. Legal Zoom comments then replied, prepares his actions, and, if necessary, file the paperwork completed, the supervisory authorities. The first national brand for consumers, Legal zoom is the rapid transformation of a wide range of $ 23 billion.

“We opted for the Rogers Group on the grounds that the Agency for registration on the basis of their strategic vision, a great deal of experience in marketing and the success of consumption in a wide range of new markets,” says Michael Turner, Chief Marketing Officer at Legal Zoom. “The group Rogers understands clearly the mission and vision of the Legal zoom and showed how its network can provide instant effectiveness of programs with effective results.”

One of the biggest public relations and strategic communications of the company, on the west coast, The Rogers Group to develop and implement, consumption and Corporate Public Relations Legal zoom programs, including traditional and online media for the general public for his work in progress and new product offerings rollouts.

About the Rogers Group

The Rogers Group (http://www.rogerspr.com) offers a full range of communications strategy for businesses, government and non-profit organizations. With headquarters in Los Angeles, The Rogers Group is the world’s largest independent Public Relations / Public Affairs of the company in the country.

About LegalZoom.com

LegalZoom.com is the nation on key legal documents online and submission service. Co-founded by attorney Robert Shapiro in 2001, LegalZoom.com (http://www.legalzoom.com) offers comfort and at a lower cost in order to mind the common requirements in the regulation. Legal Zoom service offering includes: Wills, Living Wills, Incorporation, LLC Learning, Living trusts, powers of attorney, divorce, Small Claims, trademarks, patents, copyrights, and more. LegalZoom.com is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or counsel.

Digital content monitoring leader PicScout were until recently, as a witness before the House of Representatives Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property on how to the company’s image, the software can be used to establish origin of files protected by copyright which exist without free.

After the demonstration, the content of the clearance system in December to the US Copyright Office, PicScout was the only technology company asked to come back and talk more about his solution to the problem at the hearing , improving the possibility that the software can be selected PicScout, for use by the U.S. government.

PicScout Marketing and Sales Director, Maya Gura, told the subcommittee on the courts, as the business content of the clearance system, users can identify the copyright holders of the so-called “orphan Works “- protected files, whose owners are apparently unable to locate or identify.

During the year 2005, the US Copyright Office began to study issues related to the Orphan Works. Questions were raised by the various parties, that insecurity in the possession of copyright, they can both creators and users of these files in the new art work done by them or available to the public .

“I think PicScout’s testimony before the subcommittee is interesting and instructive. I believe that the technology can be part of the solution, when determining the original owner and creator of” Orphan Works “, said the President of the Subcommittee, Howard L. Berman.

“The US Copyright Office is very impressed by the image, recognition and monitoring of PicScout functions,” said Marybeth Peters, Register of Copyrights, US Copyright Office. “In addition, we are impressed by his conduct in the Massif development of new business models for copyright owners and new research tools for users of copyright.”

“We recognize that the problem of orphans Works copyright in the town and is delighted to be part of the solution available to users in good faith,” Gura said. “I am proud that PicScout was selected for many other technology companies, but even more, I am proud to support and promote artists for the creation of great art.”

Other speakers were Marybeth Peters, Register of Copyrights, US Copyright Office, Robert Allan Adler, Vice President of Legal and Government Affairs, Association of American Publishers, P. Corinne Kevorkian, President and CEO, Schumacher, Karen C. Coe, Associate Legal Counsel, US Holocaust Memorial Museum and Victor S. Perlman, General Counsel and Managing Director, American Society of Media Photographers. A record of the proceedings is available on www.copyrightoffice.gov.

About PicScout

PicScout (www.picscout.com) is a leading provider of technology services for the digital content industry. For years, the flagship of the company Image Tracker ™ has been industry standards to help owners visual assets, to control and monitor the distribution of its own images in all media. Thanks to its platform PicApp (www.picapp.com), PicScout enables publishers online, quickly and easily images creative and editorial blogs and Web sites.

PicScout headquartered in San Francisco. The company has a development and operation of the Centre in the heart Elia, Israel.

The Secret Service has raided a New York state business that exchanged dollars for grams of the digital currency called e-gold.

A bevy of agents from the Secret Service, Postal Service and local police recently detained the owners of Gold-Age, based in Syracuse, and seized computers, files and documents from the fledgling firm.

U.S. Attorney Daniel French said Friday that the investigation involved charges of credit card fraud. “We haven’t brought charges yet,” French said. “We’re in the investigative phase.”

Gold-Age owner Parker Bradley says that during his eight-hour interrogation on March 12, the Secret Service seemed less interested in credit card fraud and more interested in the mechanics of e-gold. Until last year, Bradley accepted credit cards and paid out e-gold, but said he quit because too many people used stolen credit cards when conducting business with him.

“The interrogation became less about me and more about politics and e-gold,” Bradley said. “They were trying to get me to blame e-gold for fraud. Just to be blunt, these guys have no clue about how e-commerce works, how e-gold works or what I was doing.”

E-gold is a 5-year-old firm based on the Caribbean island of Nevis that provides an electronic currency backed by physical metal stored in vaults in London and Dubai. The company says it has 181,000 user accounts and stores about 1.4 metric tons of gold on behalf of its customers.

Bradley’s Gold-Age company, which he ran with his wife out of their home until the raid, was one of about a dozen e-gold currency exchange services: He took dollars and credited grams of gold, silver, platinum and palladium to a customer’s account, less a modest fee.

“I have no political statements to make,” Bradley said. “I’m just running a business. People can use e-gold for whatever they desire.”

Jim Ray, vice president at Omnipay — the largest e-gold exchanger — says he was aghast at a Secret Service raid directed at one of his competitors and customers.

“I think the case is an outrage,” Ray said. “I think this is a symptom of too many donuts on the cops’ part…. To me, this is a very serious business. They’ve just taken out one of my best market makers for no reason.”

Still unclear is why the raid took place. French indicated that it could be more than a routine credit card investigation, saying “at this point, it’s being investigated as a credit card fraud.”

One possibility is a broader investigation directed at some users of e-gold, which is less anonymous than cash but more anonymous than credit cards. Former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers has warned of malcontents using the Net and encryption to dodge taxes, and it’s possible that the feds don’t exactly approve of a system that’s more privacy-protective than the heavily regulated banking system.

Current federal regulations require banks and credit unions — about 19,000 in all — to inform federal law enforcement of all transactions $5,000 and above that have no “apparent lawful purpose or are not the sort in which the particular customer would normally be expected to engage.”

Because e-gold is not a bank that lends money — it’s more akin to a warehouse that stores gold on behalf of its customers — it’s not covered by those rules.

Mike Godwin said the raid evokes memories of the notorious Steve Jackson Games raid by the Secret Service a decade ago, which led to the formation of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

“Why did they take the hardware?” Godwin asks. “If what they wanted was business records, why did they take the equipment in such a way that shuts down the business?”

In my first day at my new post as head of civil liberties at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the 10 US Circuit Court of Appeals covers my former employer, of the Stanford Center for Internet and Society, a fantastic victory. The decision of the court in the Golan v. Gonzales is also a victory for the First Amendment and for the overwhelming majority of creators.

In the Golan, we are challenged to section 514 under the Uruguay Round agreement URAA law or to remove thousands of books, films, musical compositions and in the public sector. We argue that these provisions are contrary to the First Amendment, because people can no longer be used these works for their own creative expression. As an example, our community orchestra and conductor, customers could not play more freely compositions for which it had bought the tickets and learned, and our film preservationist collectors and customers may no longer show or restoration copies of films in its archives.

Our argument based on the Eldred v. Ashcroft. In Eldred, the Supreme Court upheld Congress’ 20 years of the expansion of existing partnerships, copyrights, because it is a long history of copyright extensions. But not all laws are protected by copyright immunized against the revision. Copyright regulates speech, which was confirmed by limiting the list Speakers can do with a creative work. When the changes Congress’s copyright “traditional contours, the courts must conduct further research First Amendment, to ensure that these changes are not unduly burdening the right to freedom of opinion and expression in a manner unwarranted.

In the Golan, we assert that the remoteness of the public sector, as did the URAA was a change in the tradition of the contours of the law. The government has defended the URAA argue that copyright laws triggered First Amendment Congress concerns only if either limited or fair use began to set the scene, and not just modes of expression of these ideas. We argued successfully that these two limits to the protection of copyright, there were only a few, but not the only way in which copyright traditional harmony with the Constitution-free speech prohibited, and that other possible changes - including the looting of the public domain - was also unacceptable.

Consistent with our view that there are more than two traditional contours “, and that without a domain name public is one of them, the 10 Circuit Golan to fall back to the court to decide if ‘URAA goes too far into question posed.

Stanford CIS has another case concerning the constitutional limits of copyright, Kahle v. Gonzales, that we lost in the 9th Circuit, and are now seeking a review before the Supreme Court. Both Golan bleak and try to define what “traditional contours”.

In Kahle, the question is Congress’ change of a self-selection, the copyright system, where people had to register and provide guidance to indicate that we wanted to protect the rights of ‘author, to a system where each blind napkin doodle Is protected by copyright, and people are forced to grant a licence, or spend their works in the public domain, or other signs that you do not want the law copyright. This shift from a “opt-in” opt-out “marked several generations” orphan works “- creative works, copyright, but also for the owners are absent or unaffordable expensive to find. People who want to use an orphan can not find work of copyright owners for permission. These aspiring creator ‘Fear that someone appears years later, due to the infringement of copyright creating new thrills.

The 10th Circuit in the Golan, the decision should it likely that the Supreme Court and to provide verification of the bleak, listen, because there is now a split between the two courts of the Confederation regarding the First Amendment request to Congress ” Copyright legislate.

The prospect of arguing the issue before the Supreme Court is also exciting and an immense responsibility. Our hope is that the Supreme Court has confirmed its participation in Eldred, that the Congress, in light of the copyright laws, freedom of expression is at heart, and protect copyright when deviations from the Traditionally, the courts must be actively ensure that these new laws do not create a burden free speech.

From Congress and creators also need advice from the Supreme Court on how much space we are entitled, in a digital world where everyone is a copy of the transmission, but everyone can a high - speaker or an artist. For now, the First Amendment is alive and well in the 10 Circuit.

A bill, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, to the rigidity of criminal sanctions for copyright sparked fury has done, but if history is any allegation can be hard to deal with Congress.

Before the Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2007 at the Palais des Congrès can even, they must be accompanied by a member of the House or Senate. The Department of Justice has yet to find a sponsor, although the hope that a meeting with the staff Hill is a color. And while the DOJ asserts that the party support for his account, a similar exercise during the last year not to do with one voice.

“We are still checking the bill, but is based on our initial review that we have some concerns,” said Corynne McSherry, a collaborator of counsel for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “One of our greatest concerns is that it criminalizes attempts to copyright infringement.”

McSherry stated that has no precedent in copyright, and noted that the law is not unique: “It is not quite clear what is considered experimental against copyright . ”

Essentially, the bill would in turn copyright in a little more about other laws: the government could seize personal property, wiretaps, legal certainty for the first hour of injury and life in prison , in a broad and ambiguous definition, The Simple attempt to violate copyright is a crime.

The Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2007, proposed by Gonzales on Monday to change underway in the United States copyright to give the government more powers to investigate and monitor cases of extending the scope of application, which is a crime, and that stiff penalties, including the addition of living conditions for those whose activities death.

Among the proposed changes, the bill would it be easier for someone free as a rigid and repeat offenders, the penalty for repeat offences. It would be rotting increase provisions, to enable the government to take property in the commission of a crime - a PC, a house, cash on hand.

Exporting pirated material would also be a crime, and billing, interception of the federal police security authority is underway. The “attempt” provision that the mere intention of a crime, saying that the law could be extended for a computer to interpret the music full of pin next to a CD-RW as an act of piracy.

The laws of most Blickfang dramatically increases the level of sentencing for criminal activity which leads to the damage or death - like chasing bogus Lipitor or a false “UL”-Logo on a power cable that not to Underwriters Laboratories safety standards. Actions who knowingly or recklessly cause physical damage to prison sentences of up to 20 years, while those who are likely to cause the death of a defendant away from life.

About the background during a conference call Monday, a senior official of the Department of Justice pointed out that the sentence could also determine all types of pirated products “fake drugs, fake auto parts, Parts planes - everything, really, it would endanger the life or in the extremities. ”

The bill would also criminalize the intent to compel the copyright crime, the Ministry of Justice says that copyright can be more in harmony with other criminal laws. Currently, he is in fact a crime must have occurred, for the prosecutors case. The new legislation, the mere attempt to criminalize.

“(If), in a study, there is a large warehouse of DVDs, but we can not prove that they were in fact absolutely be sold or distributed, as long as we see evidence, we can costs for people trying to “The DOJ official said.

But the extension of the government’s authority to prosecute those who simply attempt, or is planning to violate copyrights raises a red flag, some critics say.

It is not surprising that music labels and Hollywood, it is expected that the proposed agreement with the regime. After all, it is similar in the last accounting year, copyright, the assumption by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), the Software and Information Industry Association and the RIAA. And it is likely that Smith, the ranking Republican on the list House Judiciary Committee, Gonzales returned “.

A representative of the RIAA, said the organization has not been verified yet, and could not comment on the accounts.

The MPAA is still in the analysis of the proposed legislation, after Gayle Osterberg, an MPAA Vice President. But they often provide support for the process, if it is not itself the bill.

“We are very pleased with the continued commitment of the Division for the protection of intellectual property, and we look forward to working with the department and Congress, as required by the process is moving,” she said.

If it reflects the transposition into national law, you may wish to suggest that the CD moved a little farther from your computer

Traditional copyright concepts that have served this nation well for centuries should guide the debate on copyright in the digital universe. As Congress fashions ways to protect commercial interests in the digital realm, it must be careful also to protect the larger public interest in broad access to information.

Digital copyright legislation, required to institute two international treaties that would protect movies, music and other intellectual property from piracy, passed the Senate and the House Judiciary Committee this spring. But controversy continues to swirl around a provision in the legislation that would make it a crime to circumvent encryption used to control access to digital material or to manufacture or sell devices that could be used to circumvent protection measures.

Movie and music producers argue that making circumvention illegal is the only way to prevent consumer theft of on-line movies, recordings and other products. But libraries and schools believe that the prohibition is so broad that it could greatly limit access to electronic information that copyright law would otherwise allow.

Existing law assures producers the right to profit from their creative works. But the law does not allow a creator to control who looks at the material or prevent the material from being circulated or lent to others. It specifically allows the ”fair use” of copyrighted materials for commentary, criticism, teaching, news reporting, scholarship and research under certain circumstances without permission from the copyright owner.

Thus a library can purchase a book, allow hundreds of patrons to borrow it and let teachers make copies of material in it for classroom use, all without infringing the copyright. Preserving these user rights is important in the digital world where copyright owners, with the right technology, could limit or prevent access to information.

The content producers dismiss fears that the Internet could become a strictly pay-for-use world as unrealistic, but neither they nor Congress can predict how the Internet will develop. That is why legislation needs to be flexible enough to deal with rapid evolution in technology and electronic commerce.

A prudent compromise approved by the House Commerce Committee last week would delay the anti-circumvention rule for two years while the Commerce Department and the Federal patent and copyright offices study the effect of the prohibition on users. The Commerce Secretary could waive the rule for any class of works where technological shields were impeding the lawful use of copyrighted matter. The situation would be reviewed every two years. Both the content producers and the libraries and schools are willing to accept this more fluid approach. Congress should adopt this plan in the final version of the digital copyright legislation.

Source : query.nytimes.com

Three years after its passage, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is still making people wonder if they are getting the right kind of protection for the right reasons.

The intent was not to turn digital technology users into criminals for making backup copies of MP3 files. In fact, one of the DMCA’s sponsors, Representative Rick Boucher (D-Virginia), wants to amend the law to balance the “fair use” rights of consumers with the protections afforded copyright holders.

“What the DMCA does is try to outlaw burglar tools,” Boucher says. “Hammers and saws and wrenches have many legitimate purposes and should not be outlawed. The same should be said about advanced technology.”

The DMCA prohibits the manufacture and distribution of devices that circumvent electronic “locks” on digital programs. The idea of stopping thieves from stealing copyrighted material is laudable, but Boucher says the law tramples on consumer rights.
When Is It Criminal?

“My proposal will be that the only time circumvention is criminal is when it is for the purpose of infringing copyright,” Boucher says. “When it is for exercising fair use rights or other benign purposes, then acts of circumvention aren’t involved.”

Making personal copies of legitimately purchased programming (digital music, for example) to use on portable devices or to play on multiple PCs or at different locations would fall into the “fair use” category. But the act of making those copies can be thwarted by manufacturers who scramble their recordings or otherwise impede the ability of purchasers to make clean copies. And they’re starting to do just that.

Developing and using technology to circumvent those electronic security measures is prohibited under the law, no matter how that technology may be used.

Producers of DVD movies and videotapes use anticopying technology to prevent duplication of their material; apparently some record companies have started to do the same thing with CDs, according to an Associated Press report.

More : pcworld.com

An economic crunch apparently makes people more defensive about protecting their property, including words, names and inventions. Patents, copyrights and trademarks, known collectively as intellectual property, have become a growing business for lawyers.

The work comes from corporations, kitchen-table inventors and entrepreneurs naming new businesses, and on the copyright side, from artists, developers of software programs and people who write just about anything. All aim to file applications with the United States Patent and Trademark Office or the Copyright Office.

But much of the work can be accomplished without a lawyer, said David Pressman, a San Francisco lawyer and author of “Patent It Yourself” (Nolo Press, 1992). The patent and copyright offices assist applicants, and self-help books can guide the motivated. At the least, consumers who do their homework can monitor their lawyers — “no trivial consideration,” in Mr. Pressman’s view.

With plenty of business, the lawyers themselves sometimes urge clients to do much of the work — which would cost at least $150 an hour.

“There’s a lot you can do to help your attorney,” said Eric Marzluf, a partner in the Philadelphia law firm of Caesar, Rivise, Bernstein, Cohen & Pokotilow.

Patents, which cover new products, manufacturing processes and designs, are the trickiest and costliest of intellectual property rights.

The patent office advises applicants to retain a lawyer. So does the Intellectual Property Owners Association, a lobbying organization in Washington. “The lawyer has tried to foresee knockoffs,” said the group’s executive director, Herbert C. Wamsley. “Also, patent and trademark office procedures are complicated.”

More : query.nytimes.com

The Clinton Administration selected China today for possible trade sanctions unless the Beijing authorities close factories that each year produce about $1 billion worth of compact disks, videotapes and computer programs pirated from the United States without the payment of any royalties or acknowledgment of copyrights.

The move underlines that now that the Administration has renewed China’s trade benefits and put human rights issues on the back burner, one of the main sources of friction between Washington and Beijing will be over trade issues and particularly copyright violations.

American officials made clear today that unless the Chinese resolve the piracy matter, the Clinton Administration will not support China’s bid for membership in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.

Japanese Case Deferred

The United States trade representative, Mickey Kantor, announcing the initiation of an investigation against China, postponed potential sanctions in a separate dispute against Japan.

He put off action for 30 days over Japanese discrimination against American companies in government purchases of telecommunications and medical equipment. Mr. Kantor said these issues were being discussed in current Japanese-American trade talks, and, given the accession yesterday of a new prime minister in Tokyo, a brief delay was warranted.

But with China, he said, the Clinton Administration would mount an immediate investigation into allegations that it had failed to protect American patents and copyrights, even though Beijing had promised last year to do so.

If the two countries cannot resolve the issue in the next six months, Mr. Kantor is empowered by Congress to impose sanctions up to the equivalent damage being done to the American economy. That could mean 100 percent tariffs on roughly $1 billion in Chinese exports.

“While, in general, China has improved intellectual-property rights laws and regulations in accord with the January 1992 memorandum of understanding,” Mr. Kantor’s office said in a written statement, “China’s enforcement of its laws and regulations is sporadic at best and virtually nonexistent for copyrighted works. Piracy is rampant in the audio-visual, computer software and publishing sectors, as well as in trademarks. Among the most egregious cases is the establishment of 26 CD and laser disk factories in central and southern China.”

Big Business Seen

The statement added that “these factories producing pirated CD’s had the capacity to manufacture up to 75 million CD’s for export to markets in Hong Kong and Southeast Asia and recently, Canada.”

“In addition, China continues to maintain hidden quotas and non-transparent regulations that effectively keep U.S. intellectual-property products, especially in the audio-visual sector, out of the Chinese market,” it said.

Mr. Kantor noted that during recent negotiations, the Chinese insisted that they had taken effective action to halt copyright infringements, despite the fact that pirated American goods were proliferating in shops right outside the meeting-room door.

“While our negotiators were just in China last week, during a break in the negotiations, they went down to a particularly notorious street to see if they could buy any pirated U.S. software, computer software, products,” he said. “They were able to buy a Wordperfect 6.0 and a so-called DOS, MS-DOS product — took it back to the negotiations, and they presented them at the negotiating table, complete with Government-stamped receipts for these products. No action has been taken against these stores to date.”

Asked if what the United States wanted was for all the factories producing pirated goods to be closed, Mr. Kantor answered:

“Well, that would be a start. The fact is we have asked China to enforce their laws. Their laws, as written, are very strong; they’re just not enforced. China ought to enforce their laws in this area in order to protect the property rights of U.S. and other foreign companies. The failure to enforce these laws is having an adverse economic effect upon not only U.S., but other companies as well.”

Source : query.nytimes.com