Podcasts about copyright alliance

Many of the core technologies behind Generative AI are not exactly brand new. For example, the "Attention Is All You Need" paper, which described and introduced the Transformer model (the "T" in ChatGPT), was published in 2017. Diffusion models—the backbone of image generation tools like StableDiffusion and DALL-e—were introduced in 2015 and were originally inspired by thermodynamic modeling techniques. Generative adversarial networks (GANs) were introduced in 2014.However, Generative AI has seemingly taken the world by storm over the past couple years. In this episode, Graham and Jason discuss—in broad strokes—what Generative AI is, what's required to train and run foundation models, where the value lies, and frontier challenges.Fact-Checking And CorrectionsBefore we begin...At around 36:16 Jason said that the Pile was compiled by OpenAI or one of its research affiliates. This is not correct. The Pile was compiled by Eleuther.ai, and we couldn't find documentation suggesting that OpenAI incorporates the entirety of The Pile into its training data corpus.At 49:07 Jason mentions "The Open Source Institute" but actually meant to mention the Open Source InitiativeApplied Machine Learning 101Not all AI and applied machine learning models are created equally, and models can be designed to complete specific types of tasks. Broadly speaking, there are two types of applied machine learning models: Discriminative and Generative.Discriminative AIDefinition: Discriminative AI focuses on learning the boundary between different classes of data from a given set of training data. Unlike generative models that learn to generate data, discriminative models learn to differentiate between classes and make predictions or decisions based on the input data.Historical Background TLDR:The development of Discriminative AI has its roots in statistical and machine learning approaches aimed at classification tasks.Logistic regression and Support Vector Machines (SVMs) are early examples of discriminative models, which have been used for many years in various fields including computer vision and natural language processing.Over time, with the development of deep learning, discriminative models like Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) and Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) have become highly effective for a wide range of classification tasks.Pop Culture Example(s):"Hotdog vs. Not a Hotdog algorithm" from HBO's Silicon Valley (S4E4)Image recognition capabilities of something like Iron Man alter ego Tony Stark's JARVIS (2008)**Real-World Example(sAutomatic speech recognition (ASR)Spam and abuse detectionFacial recognition, such as Apple's Face ID and more Orwellian examples in places ranging from China to EnglandFurther Reading:Discriminative Model (Wikipedia)Generative AIDefinition: Generative AI refers to a type of artificial intelligence that is capable of generating new data samples that are similar to a given set of training data. This is achieved through algorithms that learn the underlying patterns, structures, and distributions inherent in the training data, and can generate novel data points with similar properties.Historical Background TLDR:The origins of Generative AI can be traced back to the development of generative models, with early instances including probabilistic graphical models in the early 2000s.However, the field truly began to gain traction with the advent of Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) b y Ian Goodfellow and his colleagues in 2014.Since then, various generative models like Variational Autoencoders (VAEs) and others have also gained prominence, contributing to the rapid advancement of Generative AI.Pop Culture Example:The AI from the movie Her (2013)Real-World Example(s):OpenAI's GPT family, alongside image models like StableDiffusion, and Midjourney.Further Reading:Deepgram's Generative AI page in the AI Glossary... co-written by Jason and GPT-4.Large Language Model in the Deepgram AI Glossary... also co-written by Jason and GPT-4.The Physics Principle That Inspired Modern AI Art (Anil Ananthaswamy, for Quanta Magazine)Visualizing and Explaining Transformer Models From the Ground Up (Zian "Andy" Wang for the Deepgram blog, January 2023)Transformer Explained hub on PapersWithCodeTransformers, Explained: Understand the Model Behind GPT-3, BERT, and T5 (Dale Markowitz on his blog, Dale on AI., May 2021)Further Reading By TopicIn rough order of when these topics were mentioned in the episode...Economic/Industry Impacts of AIHow Large Language Models Will Transform Science, Society, and AI (Alex Tamkin and Deep Ganguli for Stanford HAI's blog, February 2021)The Economic Potential of Generative AI: The Next Productivity Frontier ( McKinsey & Co., June 2023)Generative AI Could Raise Global GDP by 7% (Goldman Sachs, April 2023)Generative AI Promises an Economic Revolution. Managing the Disruption Will Be Crucial. (Bob Fernandez for WSJ Pro Central Banking, August 2023)The Economic Case for Generative AI and Foundation Models (Martin Casado and Sarah Wang for the Andreessen Horowitz Enterprise blog, August 2023)Generative AI and the software development lifecycle(Birgitta Böckeler and Ryan Murray for Thoughtworks, September 2023)How generative AI is changing the way developers work (Damian Brady for The GitHub Blog, April 2023)The AI Business Defensibility Problem (Jay F. publishing on their Substack, The Data Stream)Using Language Models EffectivelyThe emerging types of language models and why they matter (Kyle Wiggers for TechCrunch, April 2023) Crafting AI Commands: The Art of Prompt Engineering (Nithanth Ram for the Deepgram blog, March 2023)Prompt Engineering (Lilian Weng on her blog Lil'Log, March 2023)Prompt Engineering Techniques: Chain-of-Thought & Tree-of-Thought (both by Brad Nikkel for the Deepgram blog)11 Tips to Take Your ChatGPT Prompts to the Next Level (David Nield for WIRED, March 2023)Prompt Engineering 101 (Raza Habib and Sinan Ozdemir for the Humanloop blog, December 2022)Here There Be DragonsHallucinationsHallucination (artificial intelligence) (Wikipedia)Chatbot Hallucinations Are Poisoning Web Search (Will Knight for WIRED, October 2023)How data poisoning attacks corrupt machine learning models (Lucian Constantin for CSO Online)Data Poisoning & RelatedData Poisoning hub on PapersWithCodeGlaze - Protecting Artists from Generative AI project from UChicago (2023)Self-Consuming Generative Models Go MAD (Alemohammad et al. on ArXiv, July 2023)What Happens When AI Eats Itself (Tife Sanusi for the Deepgram blog, August 2023)The AI is eating itself (Casey Newton for Platformer, June 2023)AI-Generated Data Can Poison Future AI Models (Rahul Rao for Scientific American, July 2023)Intellectual Property and Fair UseMeasuring Fair Use: The Four Factors - Copyright Overview (Rich Stim for the Stanford Copyright and Fair Use Center)Is the Use of Copyrighted Works to Train AI Qualified as a Fair Use (Cala Coffman for the Copyright Alliance blog, April 2023)Reexamining "Fair Use" in the Age of AI (Andrew Myers for Stanford HAI)Copyright Fair Use Regulatory Approaches in AI Content Generation (Ariel Soiffer and Aric Jain for Tech Policy Press, August 2023)Japan's AI Data Laws, Explained (Deeplearning.ai)PDF: Generative Artificial Intelligence and Copyright Law (Congressional Research Center, September 2023)Academic and Creative "Honesty"How it started. New AI classifier for indicating AI-written text (Kirchner et al., January 2023)How it's going. OpenAI Quietly Shuts Down Its AI Detection Tool (Jason Nelson for Decrypt)AI Homework (Ben Thompson on Stratechery, December 2022)Teaching With AI (OpenAI, August 2023)Human Costs of AI Training (Picking on OpenAI here, but RLHF and similar fine-tuning techniques are employed by many/most LLM developers)Cleaning Up ChatGPT Takes Heavy Toll on Human Workers (Karen Hao and Deepa Seetharaman for the Wall Street Journal)‘It's destroyed me completely': Kenyan moderators decry toll of training of AI models (Niamh Rowe in The Guardian, August 2023)He Helped Train ChatGPT. It Traumatized Him. (Alex Kantrowitz in his publication Big Technology, May 2023)https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/25/technology/chatgpt-rlhf-human-tutors.htmlBig QuestionsOpen questions for AI engineering (Simon Willison, October 2023)Adam Smith and the Pin Factory

Joining me today for the first of a two-part series is music educator and copyright advocate Andrea Pelloquin. This week's episode focuses on copyright from the perspective of the composer. Copyright Resources • U.S. Copyright Office – www.copyright.gov • Public Domain Information – http://www.pdinfo.com • Copyright Alliance – www.copyrightalliance.org • Music Publishers Association – www.mpa.org --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/garrett-breeze/support

QUESTION PRESENTED:Whether a work of art is “transformative” when it conveys a different meaning or message from its source material (as the Supreme Court, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, and other courts of appeals have held), or whether a court is forbidden from considering the meaning of the accused work where it “recognizably deriv[es] from” its source material (as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit has held).Date                  Proceedings and Orders (key to color coding)Dec 09 2021 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 12, 2022)Dec 29 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a response from January 12, 2022 to February 11, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.Dec 30 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including February 11, 2022.Jan 10 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Copyright Law Professors filed.Jan 10 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Barbara Kruger and Robert Storr filed.Jan 12 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Art Law Professors filed.Jan 12 2022 | Brief amici curiae of The Robert Rauschenberg Foundation, Roy Lichtenstein Foundation, and Brooklyn Museum filed.Feb 04 2022 | Brief of respondents Lynn Goldsmith, et al. in opposition filed.Feb 23 2022 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/18/2022.Feb 23 2022 | Reply of petitioner The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. filed. (Distributed)Mar 21 2022 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/25/2022.Mar 28 2022 | Petition GRANTED.Apr 18 2022 | Motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.May 02 2022 | Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Lynn Goldsmith, et al.May 02 2022 | Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc.May 04 2022 | Motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including June 10, 2022. The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including August 8, 2022.Jun 10 2022 | Brief of petitioner The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. filed.Jun 10 2022 | Joint appendix (Volumes I and II) filed. (Statement of cost filed)Jun 14 2022 | ARGUMENT SET FOR Wednesday, October, 12, 2022.Jun 15 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Royal Manticoran Navy: The Official Honor Harrington Fan Association, Inc. filed.Jun 16 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Art Law Professors filed.Jun 17 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Electronic Frontier Foundation, et al. filed.Jun 17 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Floor64, Inc. d/b/a The Copia Institute filed.Jun 17 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Authors Guild, Inc., et al. in support of neither party filed.Jun 17 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of The Motion Picture Association, Inc. in support of neither party filed.Jun 17 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Art Institute of Chicago, et al. in support of neither party filed.Jun 17 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Authors Alliance filed.Jun 17 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Library Futures Institute, et al. in support of neither party filed.Jun 17 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of New York Intellectual Property Law Association in support of neither party filed.Jun 17 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of American Intellectual Property Law Association in suppoprt of neither party filed.Jun 17 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Art Professor Richard Meyer in support of neither party filed.Jun 17 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Artists, et al. filed.Jun 17 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Copyright Alliance in support of neither party filed.Jun 17 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Copyright Law Professors filed.Jun 17 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Documentary Filmmakers filed.Jun 17 2022 | Brief amici curiae of The Robert Rauschenberg Foundation, et al. filed.Jun 22 2022 | Record requested from the 2nd Circuit.Jun 27 2022 | The record from the U.S.C.A. 2nd Circuit has been electronically filed.Jul 21 2022 | CIRCULATEDAug 08 2022 | Brief of respondents Lynn Goldsmith, et al. filed. (Distributed)Aug 11 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Professors Peter S. Menell, Shyamkrishna Balganesh, and Jane C. Ginsburg as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents filed. (Distributed)Aug 12 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Graphic Artists Guild, Inc. and American Society for Collective Rights Licensing, Inc. filed. (Distributed)Aug 12 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Philippa S. Loengard filed. (Distributed)Aug 15 2022 | Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument filed.Aug 15 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Jeffrey Sedlik, Professional, Photographer and Photography Licensing Expert filed. (Distributed)Aug 15 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Digital Media Licensing Association filed. (Distributed)Aug 15 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Prof. Zvi S. Rosen filed. (Distributed)Aug 15 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Senator Marsha Blackburn filed. (Distributed)Aug 15 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Professor Guy A. Rub filed. (Distributed)Aug 15 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Dr. Seuss Enterprises, L.P. filed. (Distributed)Aug 15 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Institute for Intellectual Property and Social Justice and Intellectual-Property Professors filed. (Distributed)Aug 15 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Photographers Gary Bernstein and Julie Dermansky filed. (Distributed)Aug 15 2022 | Brief amici curiae of American Society of Media Photographers, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)Aug 15 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists filed. (Distributed)Aug 15 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Association of American Publishers filed. (Distributed)Aug 15 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Professor Terry Kogan filed. (Distributed)Aug 15 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Committee for Justice filed. (Distributed)Aug 15 2022 | Brief amici curiae of California Society of Entertainment Lawyers, et al. filed. (Distributed)Aug 15 2022 | Brief amici curiae of The Recording Industry Association of America and The National Music Publishers Association filed. (Distributed)Aug 15 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal & Economic Public Policy Studies filed. (Distributed)Aug 15 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. (Distributed)Sep 07 2022 | Reply of petitioner The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. filed. (Distributed)Sep 28 2022 | Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument GRANTED.Oct 12 2022 | Argued. For petitioner: Roman Martinez, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Lisa S. Blatt, Washington, D. C.; and Yaira Dubin, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)

Keith Kupferschmid is President and CEO of the Copyright Alliance, a nonprofit entity that champions artists' and creators' rights under copyright, which fuel creativity, choice and innovation. He is responsible for overseeing all aspects of the Copyright Alliance's operations. His extensive work on the Hill has contributed to modernizing copyright law, culminating in the enactment of the Music Modernization Act (MMA), the Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement Act (CASE Act), among others.There are a LOT of scammers out there on social media impersonating me and other crypto educators and trailblazers and I need your help. Now hear this. I will never slide into your DMs to say “peace and blessings” or hey. And I will never reach out to solicit your time or your money. Like. EVER. So be careful and make good choices! FYI, I developed an entire FREE masterclass about the topic, so check out SecureYourCryptoBag.com for more information.POWERED BY ADVANTAGE EVANS™ ACADEMY  With Bitcoin and Ethereum leading the way, the cryptocurrency market is booming. And growing. With thousands of different types of crypto (and counting), crypto is a fast-paced, fast moving emerging asset class. Find out what banks, governments, and companies like Paypal don't want you to know about owning crypto and holding it in your own wallet or self-guided crypto IRA. Bottom line? It's a wave. And you deserve this opportunity to ride it all the way to financial freedom that leads to economic empowerment and generational wealth. LEARN safely, legally and confidently while you LEARN so you CAN:transform your relationship with moneygenerate wealth in the new digital cash economycreate digital ownership streams that lead to generational wealthvet, buy, store, trade, earn, and sell cryptocurrenciesengage in “defi” to lend and leverage your cryptocreate, buy and trade creative and collectible NFTsMembership includes: monthly live masterclasseslive Q&A with our expertsactive learning milestonesheadlines and hot topicsreplay libraryresources bankpreferred access to invite-only eventspreferred pricing for courses and eventsdiscounted 1:1 sessions Join now at advantageevans.com/specialGuest Contact:Web: copyrightalliance.org Twitter: @Unite4CopyrightShow Contact:Questions and requests: hello@techintersectpodcast.com Follow: Twitter @AtTechIntersect | Instagram @TechIntersect Web: Tech Intersect Podcast  Connect for exclusive content: http://eepurl.com/gKqDyP Rapternal Music (Regulate and The Rabbit Hole) by Notty Productions is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.Produced by Tonya M. Evans for Advantage Evans, LLC, and Stephanie Renee for Creator's Child Prod. Support the show

Sara: Welcome to another episode of Copyright Chat. Today I have a special guest and member of the ALA Policy Core. I, too,  am a member of policy core cohort three, and so is my guest today Timothy Vollmer welcome Timothy. Tim: Thanks for having me on. Sara: And so, I'll call you Tim for short because that's what I usually call you and Tim and I had met each other previous to becoming members of the policy core through copyright circles. I know Tim works at University of California Berkeley, with Rachel Sandberg and Tim, why don't you tell us a little bit about what you do there and and your previous work history. Tim: Yeah, sure thing. well I'm the scholarly communication and copyright librarian at UC Berkeley, and we have an office that helps scholars, understand, copyright law, the publishing process. We also deal a lot with various intellectual property and information policy issues that come up in, you know, teaching and research and an academic writing. So, we intersect a lot with copyright challenges copyright concerns that researchers have probably some of the same things that you experience working at a large academic institution. But before I was here at Berkeley. I also worked for Creative Commons for several years. And I'm sure a lot of your listeners are somewhat familiar with Creative Commons. This is a nonprofit organization that provides free copyright licenses for sharing all types of creative works, and the licenses really help provide increase sharing on more open terms, then you know the default. all rights reserved. Copyright regime. And I've also worked actually with the American Library Association, a long time ago, I was a Technology Policy Analyst at the ALA Washington office. And there we did a lot of research, and also policy advocacy on technology and other legal issues that are relevant to libraries. So thinking about things like intellectual property and copyright issues. Broadband policy, and also like organizing and educating alien members on copyright issues that come up in our library work. And then as you mentioned, I've been a part of the a la policy core, and we're part of this. The third year the third cohort. Sara: Well, it sounds like you've had a variety of interactions with the library community over the years and also the copyright community so it seems like a perfect fit for your current position, and obviously we were both drawn to the ALA policy core. And I personally was really interested in doing more advocacy with the United States Copyright Office, and just getting to know how to make an impact on policy nationwide because, of course, so much of what we do as librarians, is to try to get access to information for our patrons and copyright is one of those ways right that we try to get access is, people think of it, a lot of times as a barrier, but I think of it as kind of one of those ways of means of access right through a lot of different ways sex, you know copyright exception section one await of the Copyright Act and fair use and things of that nature. But I wonder what drew you into deciding to join the policy core. Tim: Yeah, some of the same reasons for you. I think there's oftentimes like a public conception that copyright is like a bad or like a negative thing, but in my work, you know, working with the LA Creative Commons and now working in a library. I think our role is really to educate and push on our users to exercise their copyrights and then flex their copyright muscles because because oftentimes, there are like you say limitations and exceptions such as fair use, and we need and are able to take advantage of these. And it's an important thing that we can work on together with regard to the alien policy core. I've really wanted to learn how to become a better advocates around a lot of different library issues especially some of the issues that we deal with on a day to day basis, you know, working in academic libraries. So, looking into ways that we can help push for improvements and updates to copyright law. I'm looking at digitization issues. Access to research issues, open access publishing those types of things. But I also wanted to get the more sort of plugged into policy issues, and other advocacy work for different types of libraries which I don't have that much experience with. I did start out working in a public library and also worked at the Wisconsin State Law Library and those are really interesting jobs as well but I kind of wanted to know how to advocate better for for other types of libraries as well and see how we can contribute to those space spaces. Um, so as a policy core has really provided a kind of a broad overview on how to do that and it also incorporate many different types of librarians and library workers so of course you and I are working in college and research libraries, but there's a a broad spectrum of other people so we have school librarians and people who are working in public libraries. And people are working in community libraries, those types of things. So I think the policy core has really given me and this is sort of what I wanted out of it, a better understanding of not only the issues, the policy issue that those libraries sort of encounter, but how we can work together to advocate for better outcomes. Better funding better public policy outcomes for all types of libraries. Sara: That's a really great point and I often when I teach about copyright at the high school at the University of Illinois. A lot of my students are surprised when they realize just how much copyright will impact their work right as, for instance, a school librarian or a public library and I mean copyright is kind of one of those all inclusive topics and so it has really given, both of us I think an opportunity to grow our network and to kind of understand what the different areas are that different people are struggling with through the pandemic there's been a lot of funding issues, there's been a lot of broadband issues. And it's been really interesting to kind of learn what people are handling right now and and and it seems like right now there's also a lot of fights ago about freedom of information and right you know different books that are on the shelves that maybe parents don't want to see on the shelves in a children's library or a school library so there been so many different issues that we've been hearing about which has been really interesting. Tim: Yeah, you're totally right like issues around intellectual freedom around broadband access for libraries, these are ones obviously that maybe you and I don't deal with on a day to day basis but it's important to be able to advocate for them, and with them for other library workers and other libraries as well. Sara: Yeah. And so we have the opportunity. Not too long ago to go to Washington DC and to have a face to face meeting with our cohort of course our cohort began in the middle of Kovats so normally we would have done that much earlier but I thought that was one of the most useful parts of our training because we learned some really fascinating. Media techniques right and we're kind of putting the hot seat with, you know, pretend that you're doing like a video interview right now and what what is this going to look like. I found that really challenging but also really interesting and helpful in terms of training and I've had some similar training here at University of Illinois but I felt like this was even more targeted because the folks doing the training or media specialist. What did you find to be a kind of the most rewarding part of your training as part of the policy core. Tim: Yeah, um, I will say that media training was a little bit outside of my comfort zone, I guess, but I really appreciate that we were able to do it, especially in the context of understanding how to best communicate a message with the decision maker or a member of Congress, or with the media because crafting a clear, concise, usually short message about a policy topic that you're advocating for is really crucial. You know, one thing I was actually involved with last year as a part of the policy Corps was doing a virtual Hill meeting with a staffer on on library funding issue so we were advocating for an increase in a library funding. And, you know, one thing that was really interesting and important to know about in this meeting was really short, it was like a 10 minutes, like zoom meeting with a staffer and something that we talked about going into the meeting as we were as we were kind of building up. What we wanted to talk about and how we wanted to deliver it it was like the understanding that a lot of these staffers. They cover, you know, 10 issues or more. And maybe library is just one of them, or maybe they only deal with library issues in their capacity as someone who's involved in education. So, sort of understanding that we need to craft a very sort of deliberate and concise message about the policy ass, or the policy issue that we're talking about, is really important so that was one of the most interesting pieces from like the media training that I sort of took took took away from it, but also lots of other great sort of tips around how to, how to host like events, how to get your message out in a variety of different forms so obviously it's not all just meeting with legislators, it's about creating campaigns and doing social media and thinking about sort of online messaging. And I know we do a lot of that sort of in our work as well. And then, you know, kind of talking a little bit more broadly with regards to the policy core and maybe some of our issues. There are a lot of different ways that we can we can advocate, you know, one of them is talking with policymakers and entering into conversations and relationships with staffers that deal with intellectual property and library issues. But another thing that you mentioned earlier is dealing with institutions like the corporate office, because a lot of, not necessarily policymaking, but a lot of public input and advocacy actually runs through groups like the copyright office. So looking at the various sort of ways and venues for advocacy around library and copyright issues, is something that's been good for me it's particularly with regard to the policy car, and I think it's been good for other people as well, just to kind of understand where are the leavers that we can pull and push to get better outcomes for my library policies. Sara: Yeah. and when you were mentioning the day on the hill I participated in that as well the virtual one and it was really tempting when meeting with a staffer to just jump right into like. Here are the 5 million things that our library has done for you, you know, and here are the things that we need for the community and to continue doing this. But Shawnda Hines from a la policy was in my meeting one of my meetings and instead of law, allowing us to kind of launch in she, she started with a question, and she said to the staffer. What is your experience in libraries, do you have a library card, and it was amazing because the response to the staffer was, oh I worked in a library all through college. So not only, you know, almost, almost everyone I won't say everyone but almost everyone has been to their library right so they have some experience, but this woman had more than the average amount of experience when she had been in the library, every single day working behind the scenes and really knew the struggles of the library and was a real, true library supporter and so after that, after that knowledge, it was so easy to have that conversation because she was she said right off the bat I worked in. I worked in the library all through college and I really love libraries and I really support them. And it's like okay so you're on our side like you know, you don't have to do this hard sell here, you know, and it's still important to like make your points but it was really key to make that emotional connection with her because I think that if you just forget about that, then you don't hear what their personal story is their personal connection, you might miss that golden opportunity right because if you're if you're looking for funding for a specific thing maybe they have experienced with that thing right I mean, right now, the issue is broadband for a lot of libraries right because students from school, potentially don't have internet. Well, guess what, what if the staffer you're talking to grew up in a rural area. What if they had no internet at their house like they would have a personal connection to what you're talking about and you would never know that. And so you really want to make that connection if you can. And I think, you know, one of the things that I learned also during that time Shonda spoke with us at the policy core training and said, You know, there's a fine line between, you know, people kind of treating libraries as, like, Oh, that's so cute. You're the library, you know, versus like you're a serious part of our society right so you don't you don't want to make it like, oh, didn't you go to story time when you were five, you know it's not a library story but like to understand that we that librarians and libraries really have an impact on our society, and that we need to fund them because if we don't students can't necessarily go to school or students aren't going to learn or, or, you know, if you don't have that access. You may not learn about science, or some other area that that you know you could have a future doctor who really doesn't have access to these types of books at their school and comes to the library and read about it, or who knows what the experience might be right. I know I read about a, an astronaut who grew up, and he was just tied to his local library right and always reading about like outer space and just had this big dream and became an astronaut one day I mean, these are the kinds of things that libraries can do. And, but trying to really make, make it real for somebody and I think so starting with that human element. To me, that was a really great lesson not to just launch into the logic, because we all just want to start with like here's why we need this money, you know, right, right. But if we can connect with them on a human level like on a personal level, it's going to make it a lot easier. Tim: Yeah. Right on. Another thing I was thinking about is, um, you're right and asking those probing questions and trying to connect with policymakers on a personal and emotional level is really key, but also doing our homework as well so how did have how have they voted in the past, around library issues. What have they supported what have they been maybe not so great on sort of understanding their history a bit with with libraries and and pulling those things up and having that those data points on hand is really helpful going into these meetings with decision makers. Another thing that we did, which I think is really important in any sort of advocacy meeting and ask is coming, prepared with local data and stories and impact. So, you know, in the meeting with the legislative staffer for representative Lee in my district, I talked a little bit about how the Oakland Public Library, which is, you know, the city where I live in how they were making content available and services available during the pandemic and pulling out two or three or four top things that they were working on, which could and should require more funding to continue. So coming up with those local stories and hearing from people on the ground is really important. In addition to, you know, really communicating the importance of funding or improving policies for libraries more generally. Sara: Yeah, that's very true having those data points but also those stories of like real life scenarios. During the pandemic despite my being a copyright librarian who never does circulation, I was actually working in circulation, because we were kind of all hands on deck. I mean, we had a lot of folks who couldn't come in at all due to, you know, underlying medical conditions or family members with underlying medical conditions like before we have the vaccine available. And we really had a call to the whole library saying you know who can come in and help so I had, I learned how to do some circulation, you know, which was really good and and and it really gave me some sort of knowledge of, you know, on the ground, of what my colleagues go through on a day to day basis but it also gave me that crucial contact with patrons because I was really missing that interaction. And so, you know, the pandemic really gave us an opportunity to like change our skill set a little bit, and to also like get to know our other colleagues like I don't normally work in circulation so I don't necessarily know all my colleagues in circulation and so I got the opportunity to kind of spend time with them and to learn our patrons a little bit more and see what they were you know what their needs were. So I think that there are a lot of stories like that and the public libraries really were doing tremendous thing, you know, this is an academic library but the public libraries to we're doing tremendous things during the pandemic right to keep to keep everybody reading and keep everybody engaged because really like we couldn't for for quite some time in Illinois we couldn't leave our house. So, you know, if the students couldn't get on the internet and if you couldn't, you know, read books at your house, then you really didn't have a lot to do, and especially education wise. So I think those stories are really important, I think you're right. And I really valued getting to know you know some different levels of service and different people in the library too. So, I guess one. I wanted to change the topic a little bit and talk about you know what we've done. Copyright wise, since we've been a member of the policy core. And one of the big issues that still isn't resolved, is the CASE opt out for libraries you want to tell us a little background about that and how we were engaged with that. Tim: Sure, so maybe to back up a little bit. So, the CASE Act passed at the end of 2020 and C stands for the Copyright Alternative to Small Claims Enforcement Act. And this was a law and the aims of the law was to provide an alternative venue for copyright holders to pursue smaller dollar copyright infringement cases, instead of filing a federal copyright law suit which costs a lot of money, typically, and can take a really long time. And so, the case act sets up this copyright claims board that sits within the corporate office. And the point of this copyright claims board is to adjudicate these smaller copyright infringement proceedings. And we should note that these proceedings are voluntary. So if you have a claim brought against you. So if someone accuses you of infringing their copyright and wants to take you before the copyright claims bar, you don't have to agree to go through that venue, you can opt out as an individual. And that's a really important feature of this law. And this is a from a library perspective, we see it it says concerning law for variety of reasons. So, one thing, thinking about copyright and how copyright interacts with libraries and with researchers. We know that researchers and teachers, they leverage these limitations and exceptions to cart braid all the time like fair use. So, you know, researchers use images or copyrighted content within their own original research, because we all know that scholarship builds on the works of others and there are important limitations to cooperate that allows faculty and researchers to be able to do this. But sometimes that might not be communicated to rights holders, you know. So, what we see coming out of this case that would be possibly, you know rights holders brain these infringement actions against, you know, a scholarly researcher, because they think the scholarly researcher improperly used a piece of copyrighted content when in fact, perhaps a scholarly researcher was including that content under one of their rights under copyright like fair use. So, there's a big concern that when this copyright claims bar actually gets up and running. Are we going to have a ton of claims being brought against researchers or even students for incorporating copyrighted content under fair use in their research and teaching, and what are the implications of that going to be, you know, of course the limits on what the monetary damages within the case act and within this copyright claims or are some are a lot less than what they would be with a normal federal copyright lawsuit, but they're, they're not nothing You know, there's a cap of $30,000 per infringement proceeding and another that's nothing to sneeze at. So, one way that this CASE Act is concerning is that you know it might be, it might be a chilling effect for researchers they might think twice about incorporating others copywriting content into their scholarship, if they're afraid that they're going to be brought before this copyright claims board for use that should be covered under fair use. But another piece of that is concerning is during the implementation. So, the Copyright Office has been engaging in NPR, and then NPR m sound stands for a notice of proposed rulemaking. And these are things where the corporate offices looking for feedback from the public on how a particular law should be implemented. So, the corporate office has issued several, several of these NPR around the case act, about how it should be implemented, once it actually is up and running. And one thing that was up concerned for library is it for libraries is that while libraries and archives institutions can preemptively opt out of this. What it doesn't extend to our library workers so workers like you and I, who are working within libraries and we deal with copyrighted content on a daily basis, you know, we provide information and guidance around digitization projects, we're involved with things like interlibrary loan, we deal with copyrighted works. So what the NPR and was asking for is. We know that libraries and archives as institutions are opted out, but they held in their, in their first sort of draft of this. Well, we're not going to provide that, that, that opt out for library workers, And we thought, and a lot of libraries are on country thought that this could be a very negative way to pursue for the copyright claims board because us working with copyrighted content on a daily basis. We provide education. What we don't want is library workers to be dragged before the copyright claims board for infringement claims for things that we know and we are operating in good faith, under our limitations and exceptions to copyright. So maybe you want to talk a little bit more about sort of the advocacy and how we organize around that aspect. Sara: Yeah, so we saw the proposed rule come out and it basically said that even though, as you said, the library can opt out preemptively and basically just opt out once and say, You know where this library is not going to participate in these. Small Claims Act cases. They, the US Copyright Office, read the CASE Act as only applying to libraries and not to their employees and kind of did so under an agency, sort of analysis saying, well, this is, you know, the employees can still be liable, potentially, it's just saying that there's no like vicarious liability here for their lawyer, and my reaction to that was that that doesn't make any sense right just because the reality is that libraries do not do the work, the work on a daily basis of the libraries is done through their employees, and therefore if you don't want to hold libraries liable. You shouldn't hold their employees liable. It makes no sense to me right. It's like basically don't go after the deep pockets here at the Library, which doesn't even have that big of pockets but go after the, you know, staff member who made the copy that doesn't make any sense. And I really don't think that that's what Congress intended. When they enacted the case act and so what we did was the LA policy core members Tim and myself and Carla and along with la kind of came up with this, this, this letter that folks could use if they wanted to submit it to the copyright act in response to their proposed rule, and it was just a form letter but allowed folks to put in their individual, you know position their name and what they do that, that gives them concern. So for instance, I said you know I'm a copyright librarian at the University of Illinois. And if you are going to enforce this against me in the scope of my employment, that's a problem because I deal with copyright every day. This is my job right I have to make you know various determinations for my own news I provide folks with information about copyright. And so, you know, I could get 10 of these notices every day, you're going to get sued every day. And so the reality is it would really stifle me from doing my job. And so a lot of folks responded in fact the Copyright Office still has not issued their final rule on this and said that they had thousands of these notices because one of the notices from library futures had an Excel spreadsheet with thousands of responses and there were at least 135, I think, responses so they got a lot of feedback from librarians, basically saying this is not going to. This is not a good thing. Right. I wanted, I still think the door is open. If Congress really feels that they the Copyright Office got it wrong to come through and say, No, you know, they I guess they could amend the case act and say, no, this really means also employees. I did reach out to Senator Durbin, from Illinois, saying hi Senator Durbin I know you supported the case act but you couldn't have possibly meant that this doesn't apply to library employees right and trying to put it on his radar because I know the final rule isn't out yet but if the final rule does still apply. If the Copyright Office says it does still apply to library employees within the scope of their employment. Then I really think my next step is going to be to talk to Congress and say, Is this really what you meant because I don't think so. Well, I still hold out a little bit of hope that we made some progress with our arguments. And our common sense to the copyright office but we haven't heard back yet. So what do you think Tim. Tim: Yeah, I think you touched on a lot of good points there, um, one thing. Well, first off, I mean I'm really glad that the corporate office has issued these NPR M's because it does provide a public venue for citizens and organizations to provide feedback and commentary on how our particular this particular law should be implemented. And that is important, and the Copyright Office, there are reading these you know so it's great that we have this venue. And you mentioned that there are a variety of different ways to respond. Like so. Some of some organizations such as the library. Copyright Alliance. Individual universities and libraries I know from the, from speaking from the University of California. We submitted a letter, which was signed on but I think almost all of the UC schools, talking about what the negative repercussions of including library workers as subject to these proceedings would be, and we provide very detailed and specific examples, and also talked about the legal aspects of it, like you mentioned, have some discussion around this idea of agency law, so that you know if the library itself is able to opt out, why isn't the library able to delegate that opt out to those who are working for it. So on the one hand, we have institutions and schools, writing detailed responses to the CRM. And also we have the public who are able to provide individual stories like you and others, and and also just anyone can can file a response to this NPR. So it's important to kind of like, hit it at multiple levels, because the corporate office is reading these. It's good that we've provided detailed responses. And it also good that we're hearing from the public, and from those workers that it's going to affect. Another reason that this is really important is that you know the CASE Act has been around for a few years, but only at the end of 2020 and did it gets pushed through into becoming a law. And the way it did that was attached to a gigantic piece of spending legislation. And this is very problematic because there's not really any opportunity then to have some back and forth and to have feedback from the communities that it was going to affect you kind of got pushed through at the last hour before the end of the year, along with a ton of other bills. And there was not that much opportunity for libraries and library workers to comment that that point. So it's good that we can use some of these NPR on processes to lay out the issues and lay out how we think they should be improved, especially for the Ah, so we're going to keep our eyes open for that final rule and see, see where that goes. I mean I would read a huge sigh of relief, if, if we were able to sway the copyright office, and if they do find that when a library ops out its employees are also opting out. But if not, like I said, then, you know, I will still feel that there's some, some advocacy work to be done with with Congress and to say, Hey, is this what you meant because you have the ultimate word of what you met on the other side of that though. You know there is still work going on behind the scenes to challenge the the court or the board claims board when it does start hearing cases as unconstitutional. So there are a lot of things going on here and it's, nothing's going to get resolved, super quickly. I would say that this is one of those things we need we all need to keep an eye on because as things progress, we'll know more and more and we will will need to kind of react to those changing environment. So it's a good thing to have to be aware of. It's a good thing to keep track of. And, you know, I believe that the, they will start hearing actual claims in around June, at the latest that seemed like that was what they were doing so well I'm thinking going to start hearing some of these final rulings coming out very soon. Another thing that we're doing, and I'm sure you are and other schools as well is doing a little bit of education around what this law means and what does it mean. So for our library users or our university, communities, if we were to receive one of these claims notices. Of course we know that everyone has the ability to opt out. But it's really going to be up to the individual. To determine that but we know that libraries can help provide education around some of these copyright policy issues on our campuses and we're starting to do that right now. And also being in communication with our legal departments within the universities because they're going to probably want to know about these things as well, you know to what extent, our faculty or students or researchers, getting these notices. What are they going to do about them and how can we provide education, you know with the knowledge that we can't really provide legal advice but how can you provide education to help our communities make good decisions about what this means and how they might want to proceed. Sara: And that's a really good point there so we, you know, as, as you mentioned, Tim. This is going to be an issue for for everyone really whether or not the libraries, and their employees can opt out because we've still got scholars and students and other folks who could potentially be sued. The other issue is that it does exempt. At least University of Illinois writ large because it's a it's a government or state institution, which seems to kind of go hand in hand with sovereign immunity, where, you know, the University of Illinois cannot be sued for copyright infringement in federal court, either due to sovereign immunity. But then it leaves the question of what about the employees of the university within the scope of their employment, how does that work out. And so there are still some questions that really don't have great answers. And it's very similar to the library opting out, and the employees, maybe being on the hook what's, what do we have what happens when the professor is in a similar situation so it'll be really interesting. I mean from from a standpoint of like a lawyer, right it's kind of interesting to see this play out and see these cases go forward but from a standpoint as a librarian it's a little frightening, to be honest with you because I would not want a patron say faculty member to come to me and say I just got this, you know, what do I do, and then oh I got this two months ago I forgot to opt out now I have to go. You know, and then see what happens it's like that would be scary and not a fun experience so yes we definitely need to educate folks so that they do know if they can opt out and figure out why they might want to opt out versus go through. I mean, in my opinion, and this is not legal advice but I would, I would opt out every time I mean, I'm not sure why would go to this board, and you know willingly. Because, you know, federal court is much harder for them. There is, it's harder for the plaintiff and there's a lot more they have to pay and go through. So, I'm not sure what what would motivate someone to go to the small claims court I'll be interesting to see what types of cases end up there, although that scares me to that some of the claims that end up there the folks who, you know, didn't really pay attention to the notice and it just laughs and then all of a sudden, they have they have to go. I don't like that idea, because, to me that's not really voluntary that's just like I didn't really pay attention. Right, but I'm thinking that's going to be some of the cases unfortunately because that's that happens in, you know, in regular court too is you get what's called a default judgment because the other person just never shows up. And, and that can be good for the plaintiff but it's that's never going to be good for the defendant and if they are professors or students. Tim: That's not good. I wouldn't like, I would not like to see that happening so yeah i think one possible mitigating factor is, it seems like the law and the corporate office has been doing some due diligence, about what gets put into these notices and making sure that they are official, they are served using the how other things are served on people so sending you a notice through the mail, sending a bottle up notice within that 60 day window if you didn't get the first one, it'll be interesting to see actually how it plays out. But hopefully there are some of those measures that are set up that will allow people to be able to have information to make those decisions. Before that 60 day window runs out because you're right. Otherwise, we're just going to have a lot of default judgments because people are going to be like well what is this and is this just spam or as am I being trolled here I don't know so that's all uh to be determined yet. Well, and even in, even in quote unquote regular court right default note default judgments happen, and even there where you have to show proof of service right that you know they were personally served and and the the notices are very clear and, you know, you have to do this and answer within 20 days and whatever folks still don't get their act, gather all the time. Now of course you can't opt out. In that instance like you know you have to show up it's like, no, don't even do anything it's like they just sit there then they get a default judgment so I'm a little concerned and I'm especially concerned I'll tell you about students, because I do think professors I think professors if they get this notice like, yeah, they're probably going to try to figure out what to do. I could see a student just being busy and just thinking like, I'll deal with it later and then forgetting about it. Sara: I could see that happening. And that would bother me a lot if that's if that happened because I know some students will be right on top of it right and and finding out all the information they need to but but yeah I just will see maybe I would hope that, that, that people aren't just go, you know, raring to go and try to sue up as many students as possible I mean that just seems like a terrible outcome of this limit of this legislation which I do think some of their goal was to deal with, you know, photographers, for instance right who posts maybe some of their work on their website but other people are stealing it and things like that and I do understand that, you know, there are issues with folks who are saying, well, I I'm losing money but I don't have enough money to go to the federal court system. I think that's where they wanted, that's like the sweet spot where they wanted to get this legislation to hit but you know I really hope that it doesn't play out in a different way. And I know the legislation also I think you pointed out recently, to me at least was that there's kind of an anti trolling mechanism, kind of trying to prevent folks from just spam, you know suing everybody. Tim: Yeah, there was a there was a provision of one of the most recent NPR, that suggested that there be a cap by Bob, I believe, 10 claims, per year, per rights holder. So I think that that could help because I think one of the fears, when we saw this originally is. Well yeah, they're just going to be copyright trolls that are sending these like hundreds of them out, you know, and see what sticks against the wall or see which they can get default judgments on but if this actually does go through where there's an actual limit, I think that would go a long way into tamping down on some of the abuse that a lot of people have been critical of this process. Yeah, so I i hope that is the case and that we don't see an you know an abuse of the system. Sara: Well, it's been a really great chat we've had here and I want to respect our listeners time so they feel like they can, you know, go and do some advocacy on their own and one thing we learned through a la is tag, tag your congressperson tag your legislator, if you're doing something on Twitter. And it's you know about your local library doing something amazing, or you need funding for something or what have you tag folks on twitter, so that they see it. Tim: Yeah. Right on, I mean there's so many issues that are that are coming up over the next few years, relevant to copyright in libraries. I mean, we have controlled digital lending, we have a lot of these state ebook laws that are being challenged now. There are other things that will come up within the next year or two. So it's important to stay involved, it's important to to engage with decision makers and there's a variety of ways of doing that. We can do it through social media. We can do it through getting involved in organizations like like the ALA, we can subscribe to like legislative alerts. We can help out in some of the organizing that sort of new groups are doing, like library futures. And just follow along. There's a lot of ways that we can all work together and be involved in a lot of these policy and copyright issues that affect libraries. Sara: Yeah, and that's a great point because one of the things that we also learned it, and policy corps that it's not just about us right. I mean, we are learning these tools and we are going to, we are empowered to pass them along and and so I hope this episode kind of inspired listeners to get more involved in to follow their local legislators on Twitter and kind of see ways that they can advocate for libraries as well. So, and also obviously pay attention when a la has a policy alert and wants you to call your local senator or your local legislator, you know, give them a call because that's one of the ways that we can make an impact right.

QUESTION PRESENTED:Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit erred in breaking with its own prior precedent and the findings of other circuits and the Copyright Office in holding that 17 U.S.C. § 411 requires referral to the Copyright Office where there is no indicia of fraud or material error as to the work at issue in the subject copyright registration.DateProceedings and Orders Jan 04 2021 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 8, 2021)Jan 19 2021 | Waiver of right of respondent H&M Hennes & Mauritz, L.P., et al. to respond filed.Jan 27 2021 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/19/2021.Feb 09 2021 | Response Requested. (Due March 11, 2021)Mar 04 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 11, 2021 to April 1, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.Mar 05 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 1, 2021.Mar 11 2021 | Brief amici curiae of American Society of Media Photographers and California Society of Entertainment Lawyers filed.Apr 01 2021 | Brief of respondents H&M Hennes & Mauritz, L.P., et al. in opposition filed.Apr 12 2021 | Motion of petitioner to delay distribution of the petition for a writ of certiorari under Rule 15.5 from April 21, 2021 to May 4, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.Apr 13 2021 | Motion to delay distribution of the petition for a writ certiorari until May 4, 2021 granted.May 03 2021 | Reply of petitioner Unicolors, Inc. filed. (Distributed)May 04 2021 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/20/2021.May 24 2021 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/27/2021.Jun 01 2021 | Petition GRANTED limited to Question 1 presented by the petition.Jun 25 2021 | Motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.Jul 12 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 3, 2021. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including September 21, 2021.Jul 13 2021 | Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Unicolors, Inc.Jul 19 2021 | Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, H&M Hennes & Mauritz, L.P., et al.Aug 03 2021 | Brief of petitioner Unicolors, Inc. filed.Aug 03 2021 | Joint appendix filed.Aug 10 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Copyright Alliance filed.Aug 10 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of The Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago in support of neither party filed.Aug 10 2021 | Brief amici curiae of American Society of Media Photographers and California Society of Entertainment Lawyers filed.Aug 10 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of American Intellectual Property Law Association filed.Aug 10 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Intellectual Property Law Professors filed.Aug 10 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of the United States filed.Aug 16 2021 | ARGUMENT SET FOR Monday, November 8, 2021.Sep 01 2021 | Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.Sep 21 2021 | CIRCULATEDSep 21 2021 | Brief of respondents H&M Hennes & Mauritz, L.P., et al. filed. (Distributed)Sep 22 2021 | Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument filed.Sep 27 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of New York Intellectual Property Law Association filed. (Distributed)Sep 28 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Professors of Copyright Law filed. (Distributed)Sep 28 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Center for Democracy & Technology and Electronic Frontier Foundation filed. (Distributed)Sep 28 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Andrew D. Lockton and McHale & Slavin, P.A. filed. (Distributed)Sep 28 2021 | Brief amici curiae of California Fashion Association filed. (Distributed)Sep 28 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Victoria Burke filed. (Distributed)Sep 28 2021 | Amicus brief of National Retail Federation not accepted for filing. (Corrected version submitted) (October 04, 2021)Sep 28 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of National Retail Federation filed. (Distributed)Oct 12 2021 | Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument GRANTED.Oct 14 2021 | The record from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit is electronic and located on Pacer.Oct 14 2021 | Reply of petitioner Unicolors, Inc. filed. (Distributed)Oct 18 2021 | The time for oral argument is allotted as follows: 20 minutes for petitioner, 15 minutes for the Acting Solicitor General, and 35 minutes for respondent.Nov 08 2021 | Argued. For petitioner: E. Joshua Rosenkranz, New York, N. Y.; and Melissa N. Patterson, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondent: Peter K. Stris, Los Angeles, Cal.★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

The Frankfurt Book Fair was a completely virtual event this year. Licensing and permissions expert MaryJo ("MJ") Courchesne of Gryphon Publishing Consulting reports on her experience, and also discusses the CASE Act, fair use, and piracy.Topics CoveredFrankfurt Book Fair roundup, physical vs. virtualWhen to start prepping for next year's FrankfurtDo you need a rights and permissions manager?How is the rights business these days?Update on the CASE Act, a small-claims court for settle rights-infringement disputesThe scourge of book piracyThe IBPA Advocacy CommitteeSome thoughts on fair use and permissions, and why you need to make informed decisionsLinksCASE Act (summary with IBPA links)https://www.ibpa-online.org/news/518209/A-CASE-Act-Call-to-Action-for-IBPA-Members.htmFair Usehttps://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/more-info.htmlDMCA notice and takedownhttps://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/DMCA_Good_Bad_and_Situational_Practices_Document-FINAL.pdfFree 30 min consultation for IBPA members: https://calendly.com/gryphonpubcons/ibpa-30-minute-consultParticipantsMary Jo (“MJ”) Courchesne is the owner and principal rights consultant of Gryphon Publishing Consulting, LLC (www.gryphonpublishingconsulting.net). A publishing veteran with experience in trade, academic and direct-response publishing, she has spent nearly 2 decades specializing in licensing, subsidiary rights, and permissions.She is a frequent and polished presenter on licensing and copyright. She firmly believes that everyone from authors to publishers to corporations should “know their rights” when it comes to intellectual property. To that end, she instructed in The George Washington University’s Masters in Publishing program for 13 years, first for 11 years as Adjunct Professor for a course entitled Editorial Content, Rights and Permissions, and subsequently as Lecturer in a course on copyright.She is a member of the Copyright Alliance, the Independent Book Publishers Association (IBPA), and the Society of Children’s Books Writers and Illustrators (SCBWI). She has also held memberships with other organizations such as the American Society of Picture Professionals and Washington Publishers.She currently serves on the Advocacy Committee for IBPA, as the copyright expert within the board of experts of the National Association of Independent Writers and Editors (NAIWE), and is Secretary and board member for The Big Easy in Buffalo.Twitter: @GryphPubFacebook: www.facebook.com/gryphonpublishingconsultingPeter Goodman (host) is publisher of Stone Bridge Press (www.stonebridge.com) in Berkeley, California. He began his publishing career in Tokyo, Japan, in 1976. A longtime member of IBPA, he has served on the IBPA board and as IBPA board chair.For more information, go to IBPA at https://www.ibpa-online.org/.

Using content to connect with potential patients and grow a medical practice has become increasingly popular. Most practice owners are using some form of content to promote their business including a website, blogs, podcasts, social media posts, and/or email campaigns. In this podcast, the ethical ramifications of content marketing are explored with naturopathic physician and medical writer, Sarah Cook, ND. Download the Guide About the Expert Sarah Cook, ND, is a medical writer and a copywriter for the integrative medical community. She holds a naturopathic doctorate degree from Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine, a certificate in biomedical writing, a professional diploma in digital marketing, and she is a StoryBrand certified guide. Sarah writes website copy, email campaigns, e-books, and other marketing materials—helping clinicians and small business owners create authentic marketing messages to reach more of the people who need them most. Connect with Sarah at www.ndpen.com.  Transcript Karolyn Gazella: Hello, I'm Karolyn Gazella, the publisher of the Natural Medicine Journal. Using content as a way to connect with potential patients and grow your practice is an increasingly popular trend. Also called content marketing, most practice owners are using some form of content to promote their business. It may be a website, blog, podcast, social media posts, email campaigns. While it's true that content marketing can be extremely effective in growing your business, have you ever thought about what the ethical ramifications might be? Today I'll be talking with Dr. Sarah Cook, who is a naturopathic doctor and seasoned medical writer. Dr. Cook has worked with us at the Natural Medicine Journal on many writing projects over the years. She also helps doctors with content creation and copywriting through her company, ND Pen. Dr. Cook is here to talk about the ethical pitfalls of content marketing. Thank you so much for joining me, Dr. Cook. Sarah Cook: Thank you, Karolyn. I'm excited to be here. Gazella: Well, before we dive into these ethical pitfalls, could you briefly tell us why you think this is such an important topic for clinicians to think about? Cook: Absolutely. So, like you said, most clinicians are doing something with content. They're putting out content for their business, and most of them aren't really thinking about, "Well, how does this relate to ethics?" at all. And even if they thought about some of these things, they might not know where to go for information or really what precautions they should be taking. And I guess you asked why is it important, and I think it's really because it's just really too bad if they're well meaning clinicians, they're coming from a sincere place of wanting to put good information out to help people, and they make mistakes and just because they're not aware, and so then they end up with unexpected consequences. And so that's really what we want to avoid really just by creating awareness about it. Gazella: Yeah, it's such a good point because I do agree; I think the clinicians are coming at it from the correct perspective. Now you mentioned unexpected consequences. What do you mean by unexpected consequences? Cook: So, I mean, I can give a couple of examples of some things that I've seen happen. So for example, there was a doctor who I worked with to help him create his content for a while, and before I started working with him, he had been producing a blog, and one of his blogs, again, he just made a mistake. He found an image online that he thought went well with his blog and he posted that image along with that blog post, completely innocently, not trying to steal somebody else's content and not realizing that this image had a copyright and he was not supposed to use it. And ended up he got a letter in the mail for copyright infringement, and the thing is that the fines for copyright infringement, they're in the hundreds or even thousands of dollars, and so this is not a small thing. So, one unexpected consequence certainly could be financial. And maybe even worse, I think the other thing to think about is your reputation. Really your reputation is on the line when you're putting content out for your business. And so I can share another example of where I recently saw this play out on social media, and essentially what happened was there was ... I try to stay out of the weeds on these things. I don't get involved, and so I don't have all the details on this, but essentially it was some sort of wellness practitioner, I think a nutritionist of some sort, was creating a lot of social posts and blogging about a concept that actually another better known physician who had written a book about this topic had really already coined these ideas and like I said, written a book about this specific concept, and this other practitioner essentially was promoting the same ideas using the same terminology and not giving credit to that original doctor who had come up with the ideas and had written the book about it. And what happened, what I saw kind of play out on social media, was that people noticed and really her reputation was slammed for that. And I don't know, maybe ... We don't know. We can give her the benefit of the doubt. We don't know if she went intentionally stealing the ideas or if she just thought that she was putting helpful information out, but the mistake that she made was that she didn't give credit to the original person who came up with those ideas. So, I think that is really maybe even more important than the financial consequences is your reputation. Gazella: Oh, I would agree. I think that's such a good point. I mean, your whole business model moving forward stands on your reputation, whether or not you get new patients, patient referrals, et cetera, so I would agree. I think that's critical, and I can see that the stakes are high. So what is your direct experience with the ethics of content marketing? Cook: Yeah, so I mean, I can gratefully say that I haven't really personally suffered these consequences of making ethical mistakes. It doesn't mean I haven't made minor infringements. I'm sure I have, but I haven't been caught. But I've really just been forced to learn some of these concepts over the years of writing and creating content for the integrative medical community just really from being in the trenches and needing to. So for example, you know very well, Karolyn, when we write anything for a dietary supplement company, we need to be extremely careful about the words that we use so that we don't make any claims that that supplement treats or prevents disease, right? And so that is one thing where writing for a dietary supplement company, they usually have their own lawyers, and they make sure that you're being compliant with your language, but even when I've worked with individual doctors where we might be writing a blog and they have a product that they really want people to know about, but it's a specific dietary supplement, and so now we're in the realm of where we have to be very careful about the words we use. And we can get more into this, but you can't talk about that supplement treating disease. You have to talk about it supporting the structure and the function of the body. And so for one way, if there's clinicians listening to this and they're thinking, "Well, I'm blogging about this product," one thing I have done with doctors is like if you have any question, go to the company of that product and say, "Look, I'm writing this blog about this product. Is it okay how I'm wording this and what I'm saying?" I think it's always better to ask than to not exactly know if it's okay what you're doing. So, working with supplement companies, working with doctors is certainly where I have just been in the trenches and having to figure this out as I go. I think the other area is when it comes to email marketing, so collecting people's email addresses, building an email list is huge now as part of content marketing, and the regulations just within the last year, there were sweeping changes in the regulations that actually change what you can ethically do with a person's email address. And so as those changes in regulations rolled out in this last year, any of my clients who I've been helping with their email list, we've had to figure out how to become compliant to these new regulations. So again, a lot of these things are not stuff you can necessarily just Google and find out. A lot of it, for me, has been learning as I go because I have to, and so that's really why I wanted to talk about this subject and make sure everyone else is informed. Gazella: Yeah, it's such a good point, especially about emails, and it's interesting, I know we're going to talk about unsubstantiated claims, but I started out in the natural health industry in the early 1990s. It was like 1992. I became the marketing director of a very large supplement company, and within a couple of months after getting on the job, the company got into significant trouble with the FDA. Dozens of products had to be taken off the market. We had to change labels and literature, and I have to tell you, Dr. Cook, it was baptism by fire. I had to learn very quickly about structure/function claims, disease claims and how to write about products to keep the company safe. So, yeah, I think that that's such important topics. Now, I want to talk about- Cook: Yeah, and I really believe, like you said, you then were like all of a sudden you have to learn structure/function. Well, it's like I also think we can learn from each other's mistakes, and so you and I have worked with structure/function a lot, so if we can share some pearls so that other people don't have to go through what we've been through. Gazella: I know. It's so true, and I do like your advice about contacting the manufacturer because a clinician doesn't have the legal resources, but the larger manufacturers, they have a team of legal people that review content and make sure that the content is safe to publish, so I really like that piece of advice a lot. Cook: And in my experience, they are happy to review an article if you're writing about their product because it helps them. Gazella: Yeah, absolutely. And yeah, it's different when you're talking about a product specifically versus if you're talking generically about a nutrient or herb. Cook: Yes. Yes, absolutely. Gazella: You have to be a lot more careful. Yeah, lot, lot more careful when you're talking about a product specifically. So, let's get to the ethical pitfalls of content marketing. What are some of the common pitfalls that you've seen? Cook: So, I was thinking I would just highlight three so we keep this manageable here, so certainly copyright infringement would be one thing to talk about. Secondly, unsupported claims, which I can get into a bit more what I mean by that, but not being able to support what you say with evidence. And then the third thing, misuse of personal information, and that really comes into play when we're collecting people's email addresses and what we're allowed to do with that personal information. So I think those three things are probably a good place to start. Gazella: Yeah. I would agree, those are perfect. So let's talk a little bit about that first pitfall. What advice do you have for clinicians to help them avoid copyright infringement? Cook: Yeah, so honestly, this one probably is the easiest pitfall to avoid if you just have a little bit of awareness. But copyright applies to any content that somebody else has created, so it applies to words, images, videos, and it even applies to ideas, and so the example I gave of where the practitioner had been using these ideas from a book and not giving credit to the author of that book, she wasn't directly copying any paragraphs from that book, but she was copying the ideas, and it's something that's called derivative work. We use that word derivative where it's basically like she's deriving that content, and that is a form of copyright infringement that people might not realize. You don't have to directly copy the words to be infringing on their copyright. So, derivative work is just something to keep in mind where ... I mean, the point is give credit to the person who came up with that idea in the first place. That's all you need to do. And that really goes across the board for any kind of a word. Any words, written content that you are using from somebody else, it's really just a matter of giving them credit, so either linking over to their website or linking over to wherever it was first published in a different article. Giving credit. Images. Images are something to think about. Again, I gave that example of where the doctor didn't realize he shouldn't be using that image. You can't just go to Google images and use any image that comes up. Most of those would have a copyright on them, and here's the thing about images: it doesn't have to have that little copyright symbol on there. It doesn't have to have a watermark to be copyrighted. If somebody took the time to design that image on their own and put it on their website, by default, they own the copyright to that image, and you should not be using it without their permission. So that's something to keep in mind about images, but probably the safest way to go about using images, I would say there's 2 categories of images that you can use without getting permission because you can always ask for permission, but of course that's a hassle, and probably for the most part you don't want to bother with trying to get permission to use somebody else's images. So, really the 2 types of images you can use would be either what's called royalty-free or images in the public domain. Now, I don't know if you want me to go into what's the difference between those, or what do you think, Karolyn? Gazella: Sure. Let's just, yeah, let's touch on that. Cook: Yeah, so royalty-free images, the free part doesn't necessarily mean they're free. You can buy these, so websites like iStock, you pay for it, but it's royalty-free meaning that you're getting a license to use it freely. And so some royalty-free images are paid for, like the iStock photos. Some royalty-free images are available for free at sites like Pixabay.com for example. But the point of being a royalty-free image is that they're granting you a license to use that image freely, and usually, I always would double check what the license agreement says, but for most of these, the license agreement says you can use this freely. You do not have to tell where you got it. The word is attribution. When you give credit, you do not have to give attribution. So you don't have to even document where it came from. Most of those licenses say that for royalty-free images. And then the second category is images in the public domain. And so those are different in that they actually either never had a copyright on them or the copyright has expired, and so they're just in the public domain, again, for anybody to use freely, you do not have to give attribution. So some of the places that you would find those would be on like Wikipedia or it's called Wikimedia Commons, I believe. And that's a nice place if you're looking for more science kind of ... A lot of times you might want to draw a flowchart of the hormones from the hypothalamus down to the ovaries or something, right? That's not something you're probably going to find on iStock Photo, but you might find it in the public domain on like Wikimedia Commons for example. Gazella: Yeah, that sounds pretty straightforward, and I'm glad that you went into that detail. Now, what about that second pitfall? This is the one that I'm really interested in hearing you talk about. What do you mean by making unsubstantiated claims? Can you give us some examples? Cook: Yeah, so we can start with what we talked about when we're talking about specific dietary supplements. That's really just a matter of needing to use words that talk about how that supplement supports what we call structure/function of the body. So for example, if you're talking about a certain curcumin supplement, you can't say, "Oh, this treats pain and inflammation in arthritis." You have to just modify your wording and say something like, "Supports a healthy inflammatory response." And again, that is when you're talking about specific supplements, and I'm glad you brought up that if it is just you're generally talking about curcumin, you can be more free in your language. However, it kind of brings me to the next point about supporting your claims, and that is even if you're just generally talking about curcumin, you shouldn't be making claims that you can't back up with evidence, and so either being able to link over to some study that supports what you're saying, if you're going to say curcumin really is great for knee pain or something, then you would want to be able to link to a study that showed that or be able to at least say, "Look, this is in my experience or what I have seen with my patients," and that's perfectly fine to use as evidence as long as you're clear that that's what you're basing this on, that's what you're basing your statement on. So it's really all just about being transparent about if you're making a claim, being able to back it up with either research or your personal experience and just being open and honest about that. Gazella: Yeah. That makes a lot of sense, and I think it's a great reminder. Now let's move on to that third pitfall. What does misuse of personal information have to do with content marketing? Cook: Okay, so this really gets into collection of email addresses, and so the thing is, this is a huge trend in content marketing is give away something free. So people call it all different things; they call it a freebie or a lead magnet or a lead generator, but they're giving away maybe like a free PDF download, and it used to be that you could give away this free, really valuable piece of content, and it was just assumed that when somebody put in their email address to download that guide, they're automatically put into your email list of subscribers, and they're going to start getting your regular emails like your e-newsletter or your promotions or anything. And that actually used to be fine, and there's an email regulation called the CAN-SPAM Act, which has some items in place to make sure you don't spam people with mass emails, but it used to be very easy to be compliant with CAN-SPAM if you were using any regular kind of MailChimp or Constant Contact or any of those things, you were pretty much automatically compliant. It was just required things like having a little unsubscribe button at the bottom of every email. But here's the thing is that just in the last year, so May of 2018, regulation went into effect in Europe called GDPR, and it totally changed this situation. So, quick disclaimer, I'm not a lawyer, so please, Karolyn, do not take anything I say as legal advice, Okay? Gazella: That's a great disclaimer. I like it. Cook: This is not legal advice. Gazella: I'm going to make that same disclaimer. I'm not an attorney. Cook: I am not an attorney, but in a broad sense, I think it's useful to understand what GDPR is about because it completely relates to ethically what we do with people's email addresses. So, I want to just broadly tell you what this is. Pretty much what GDPR says is that people should have a say in what you do with their personal information. So, it's really 2 things that we need email subscribers to give us, number 1 explicit consent to email them stuff, so they need to specifically say, "Yes, I want to be on your email list," and the second thing, granular consent. So it means you can't lump everything into a bucket anymore and say, "When you download this guide, you're also going on my general email list." They need to specifically check a box that says, "Yes, I want the guide, and yes, I want to be on your email list," so they need to specifically say they want to be there to be compliant with GDPR. So, it doesn't mean ... We can still use freebies or lead magnets or whatever you want to call them. It's just a slight variation on how you create that form on your website to collect that email so that you'll be compliant. Gazella: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense, and clinical practices are used to dealing with personal health information, so as long as they take that same care when dealing with the personal emails I think that ... And it can be confusing. A lot of this- Cook: But wait. Can I say one more thing about ... I'm sorry. Excuse me. Gazella: Uh-huh (affirmative). Cook: One more thing I just want to mention because a lot of people might say, "Well, I'm a US-based business and GDPR is a European law, so it doesn't apply to me," but here is the thing is that GDPR, if somebody in Europe accesses your website, even if you're a US-based business, you need to be compliant with GDPR. And so if somebody sitting in a coffee shop in Madrid, Spain looks at your website and opts in for your guide for smoothies, then you're supposed to be GDPR compliant for that person. And so that ... Oh my gosh, email marketers are doing all different kinds of things, and some are getting really technical and monitoring like, "Oh, if somebody is in Europe and they're on my website, I'll show them the GDPR-compliant form, and if they're in New York and they look at it, I'll show them the noncompliant form." So you can get into the weeds really fast here, but in my opinion, GDPR brings up an ethical issue that is people should have a say in what you do with their information, and if they want to be on your email list, you should get their permission for that. Gazella: Yeah, I think that's a good general piece of advice, but I can also see where some of these issues might get a little complicated quickly. Where do you suggest people go for more information if they have additional questions? Cook: So, that's a great question because I think I mentioned earlier a lot of these things, Google doesn't necessarily get you where he need to go. So, I actually put together a list of resources, at least from what I have, that I can share with your listeners, and so I just put together a resource guide. It has some things of where you can find royalty-free images or images in the public domain, linking over Copyright Alliance is actually an organization that just has really simple to understand information to understand copyright law. I have a link in that guide for where you can find FDA guidance on the structure/function language, and then of course some links to where you can learn more about GDPR. So, I tried to put together just some things that I have found to be reliable and really useful in that guide, and so I think we're going to share that maybe in the show notes, but you can find it. It'll be on my website, which is NDPen.com/ethics. Gazella: Yeah, and we'll also- Cook: Oh, and by the way ... I keep cutting you off, Karolyn. I'm so sorry. Gazella: Oh no, that's okay. Go ahead. Cook: I am setting that up to be a GDPR compliant opt-in so that you can see an example of what that looks like, so you can just download the guide and that's it, or you can choose to be on my email list, but I will not just add you to my email list when you download the guide. Gazella: Yeah, and we're also going to be linking to that guide. On this page of the podcast, there's going to be a link so our listeners can just click over. I mean, from a clinician standpoint, this might be something that you're going to want to share with your office manager or the people who are actually executing your marketing communication plan, your content marketing plan. So, yeah, thank you for doing that free guide for our listeners, Dr. Cook. Now, I have a question here. With all of these ethical pitfalls, do you think that content marketing to grow a medical practice is worth the risk? Cook: Yes, absolutely. Oh my gosh. I mean, here's the thing. The chances, if you are going about this from your heart, with good intentions, honestly the chances of getting in trouble for minor infractions of any of these things is so slim. It's so slim that you would ever get in trouble for anything, and yet the benefits of getting your content out there are massive. So, I mean really, if you're putting content out there, it's a way to really show your expertise, it's a way to get ... I mean, all of these integrative health practitioners, everyone has a unique message. Everyone's message is different. They have their own authentic voice and way of sharing it, and you get that out with your content. And really, yeah, creating content takes time, and you might hire some people to help you with all the parts and pieces, but it is a really effective way to promote your business without getting into a massive advertising budget. So, I mean bottom line is like getting your content out gets you connected with people who need you the most; that's what it's about. It's about getting your message out there and helping people, and I really believe that that content marketing is a solid way to do that and really to just grow a thriving business. Gazella: Yeah, I would agree with you. I have been a content publisher of integrative health information since the early 1990s, and I really feel that content is king. So, I have a love of quality content just as you do, Dr. Cook. I think that you brought up some really good points. It allows the practitioner to showcase his or her expertise. It can help you distinguish yourself from the competition. So for example, if you have areas of expertise or specialty areas that the doctor down the street doesn't have, you can showcase that, and you can actually target the patients that you want coming into your clinic. You can use content marketing as a referral tool. There's so many great things about content marketing, and the fact that you highlighted, Dr. Cook, the fact that content marketing helps practitioners help people; it helps a ton of people, so it's not just the patients that they're seeing, it helps a broader audience, and I think that is very much in line from a vision standpoint for most of the practitioners, and that's probably true in the case of the practitioners that you're working with, that they have this mission; they're on a mission. Cook: Yep. Absolutely. Gazella: Yeah, I think that this is great. Well, this has been a lot of great information, and we are going to be submitting this podcast for continuing educational credits in the area of ethics, so thank you for helping us out it with that, Dr. Cook. Cook: Awesome. Gazella: And I hope you have a great day. Cook: Thanks so much, Karolyn. You too. Gazella: Bye-bye. Cook: Bye.

Diana MacDonald is Introducing Herself I have been a professional photographer since 1993, and have been shooting stock photography since 1996 when I moved to Florida and landed a job as an in-house stock photographer for SuperStock, a stock agency in Jacksonville. In 1998 I left the agency and branched out on my own, shooting what is known as macro stock for a company called Eyewire, which had previously been owned by Adobe, and was bought out by Getty Images. I shot exclusively for Getty for many years, but with the advent of microstock agencies, the business changed drastically, so I now shoot for 5 micro agencies as well as for Getty and for Alamy (a UK based macro stock agency.)   Social Media and the Use of Images Many Social Media platforms are full of images used without permission. In our conversation, we do mention Steemit a lot since that is the platform we met. In Diane's opinion, Steemit allows the illegal use of images because the community is expected to be self-policing. They do not tolerate plagiarism, which means claiming the image is your own. You can attribute her work to Mickey Mouse and it is OK with Steemit. Plagiarism is not illegal, but copyright infringement is. Incorrect sourcing is also considered copyright infringement. Google is not a source. It is a search engine. The SOURCE is the photographer.  Web MD etc.   is not a source. It is a website which most likely paid a licensing fee for an image. Of course, this kind of behavior is rampant on all social media websites. The countless meme being shared over and over again on Facebook or Twitter use often - or maybe most of the time- a photo grabbed from the web. Diane says that anything published online can be found on the web. Contributors are taking a lot of chances by infringing on copyright. Agencies and photographers DO go after infringers. It is very easy to do a reverse search and find their work. Not knowing is not accepted as being an excuse in the courts! The user is expected to track down the real source of every image used. Diane was recently paid a sum which Getty collected from the illegal use of one of her images on the web. In the world of advertising and graphic design, it is NOT OK to simply take an image and cite the source!  Professionals just don't work that way. You cannot copy a copyright image and simply give a SOURCE. Only the copyright holder has the right to use the images. All Rights Reserved means just that. The copyright holder owns ALL rights, so permission must be given to the user, regardless of whether a source is cited or not. The problem with sites like Pixabay etc. is that that they take the word of the persons uploading an image. If they say that they own the copyright and that they are waiving copyright ownership, Pixabay and similar companies will accept that.  However, this is not always the case. Now, this is important to know: Pixabay is not liable, but the person uploading AND THE END USER are liable for any infringements. Another problem with using images from Pixabay etc. is that many do not understand the world of model and property releases. The images may have been uploaded by the person who has taken the photos, some properties may not be used without a property release. Certain buildings may not be used at all in stock images, but the photographers on Pixabay probably don't know those restrictions. It is illegal, for example, to license images of the Eiffel Tower at night. The same holds true for many city skylines and for anything related to Disney. Using images of people is particularly troublesome because the end user has no idea whether legitimate model releases were obtained from the models. Also if people are taking images off the web and not getting them from the proper stock source, they have no idea what restrictions there are on the use of those images. This could lead to some nasty legal entanglements. Images are licensed for specific usage when they are Rights Managed Images. Royalty Free Images may be re-used by the licensee WITH CERTAIN RESTRICIONS. If you are simply taking an image off the web, you have no idea what those restrictions are! Links to all of photographer Diane Macdonalds agencies can be found at her website: dianemacphoto.com She is a member of the Copyright Alliance: http://copyrightalliance.org/ Most of this article was written by Diane and is used with permission.   Claire and Mark Claire is back, this time with her husband Mark, for the second segment of her Homesteading section of the Sustainable Living Podcast.  In this segment, we not only meet Mark but find out a bit more about their history and how they are planning to move forward. Right now, the top priority is their house - but listen in to hear about badgers showing up, calfs being always born when Mark is at work and so much more.   Find Us on Steemit Diane @dmcamera Claire @fishyculture Mark @longsilver Marianne @mariannewest The Podcast @sustainablelivin

Discussion centers on the uncertainty in the United States patent system and the the “de-propertization” of intellectual property and those organizations that are driving a negative false narrative that patent trolls are ruining the system and the US needs to legislate a new solution. Adam Mossoff Adam Mossoff is Professor of Law at Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University. He is a founder of the Center for the Protection of Intellectual Property, and is now a Director of Academic Programs and a Senior Scholar. He teaches a wide range of courses at the law school, including property, patent law, trade secrets, trademark law, remedies, and internet law. He has published extensively on the theory and history of how patents and other intellectual property rights are fundamental property rights that should be secured to their owners and legally protected as commercial assets in the marketplace. He has testified before the Senate and the House on patent legislation, and he has spoken at numerous congressional staff briefings and academic conferences, as well as at the PTO, the FTC, the DOJ, the National Academy of Sciences, and the Smithsonian Museum of American History. His writings on patent law and policy have also appeared in the New York Times, Forbes, Investors Business Daily, The Hill, Politico, and in other media outlets. He is a member of the Public Policy Committee of the Licensing Executives Society, an appointed member of the Amicus Committee of the American Intellectual Property Law Association, and a member of the Academic Advisory Committee of the Copyright Alliance. He has served as past Chair and Vice-Chair of the Intellectual Property Committee of the IEEE-USA.

In recognition of World International Property Day, the U.S. Copyright Office and the Copyright Alliance presented a program that highlighted established creators who have mastered their crafts and who have created innovative revenue streams to pay fellow creators fairly. Speaker Biography: Bob Goodlatte represents the 6th Congressional District of Virginia in the House of Representatives. Goodlatte has long been a leader in Congress on a number of intellectual property and technology issues. In the 113th Congress, he was elected chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. In addition, he is the co-chairman of the bipartisan Congressional Internet Caucus and the Congressional International Creativity and Theft-Prevention Caucus, as well as chairman of the House Republican Technology Working Group. Speaker Biography: Keith Kupferschmid is chief executive officer of the Copyright Alliance. Before joining the Copyright Alliance, he served as general counsel and senior vice president for intellectual property at the Software and Information Industry Association. During his 16 years there, he represented and advised member software and content companies on intellectual property policy, legal and enforcement matters. He also supervised the association's Anti-Piracy Division, including working with federal and state officials on civil and criminal piracy cases. Speaker Biography: Devlin Hartline is assistant director of the Center for the Protection of Intellectual Property at George Mason University School of Law, where he leads the Center's communications and academic advocacy efforts. Devlin works closely with the Center's scholars to publicize and promote rigorous research on the law, economics and history of intellectual property. Speaker Biography: Jared Geller is executive producer of Hitrecord, a collaborative production company founded and directed by actor and artist Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Hitrecord has produced books, music, films, and television shows, including the Emmy Award-winning series "Hit Record on TV with Joseph Gordon-Levitt." Before teaming up with Gordon-Levitt in 2009, Geller produced shows and theatrical events at some of the world's most prestigious live venues, including more than a dozen at Carnegie Hall. Speaker Biography: Chase Jarvis is founder and chief executive officer of CreativeLive, a growing online education companies offering interactive workshops on photography, video, design, business, audio, music, crafting and software. He is also a well-known photographer, director and fine artist who seeks to break down barriers between new and traditional media and fine and commercial art. As a photographer, he was won awards from the Prix de la Photographie de Paris, the Advertising Photographers of America, the International Photography Awards and trade magazines worldwide. As a fine artist, Chase works with museums, galleries and foundations. Chase has also written three books, presents to audiences worldwide and has millions of social media subscribers, fans and followers. Speaker Biography: Anna Metcalfe is owner of Gather Art Registry, an online gallery featuring handmade local art from Minneapolis. A practicing ceramic artist, she curates the gallery's collection, serves as its artist coordinator and teaches career development to artists through Springboard for the Arts, an organization that connects artists with the skills, information and services they need to make a living and a life. Metcalfe holds a master's degree in fine arts from the University of Minnesota. For transcript and more information, visit http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/feature_wdesc.php?rec=7264

This video mission statement for The Copyright Alliance explains why copyright is central to freedom.

Hosted by the Creative Rights Caucus of the U.S. Congress, the event "Beyond the Red Carpet" in Washington, D.C. showcased the work of craftspeople working behind the scenes in TV and motion picture production.  In this interview, the Copyright Alliance speaks with colorist Siggy Ferstl about the importance of his work in the creation of a look and feel for a particular movie.

Hosted by the Creative Rights Caucus of the U.S. Congress, the event "Beyond the Red Carpet" in Washington, D.C. showcased the work of craftspeople working behind the scenes in TV and motion picture production.  In this interview the Copyright Alliance speaks with Star Trek costume illustrator Phillip Boutte Jr about the role of a costume illustrator in the greater costume department and the economic impact of movie crews on the community they are working in.

Hosted by the Creative Rights Caucus of the U.S. Congress, the event "Beyond the Red Carpet" in Washington, D.C. showcased the work of craftspeople working behind the scenes in TV and motion picture production. In this interview, the Copyright Alliance speaks with “Blue Bloods” editor Jackeline Tejada about the art of editing and the difference even minute choices in camera angles can make to the overall mood of a scene. 

Hosted by the Creative Rights Caucus of the U.S. Congress, the event "Beyond the Red Carpet" in Washington, D.C. showcased the work of craftspeople working behind the scenes in TV and motion picture production. In this interview, the Copyright Alliance speaks with effects makeup artist Cig Neutron about the process of developing a character from start to finish. 

Hosted by the Creative Rights Caucus of the U.S. Congress, the event "Beyond the Red Carpet" in Washington, D.C. showcased the work of craftspeople working behind the scenes in TV and motion picture production. In this video, the Copyright Alliance discusses the creation of 18th century costumes for the TV show “Turn” with wardrobe designer Donna Zakowska.

The Copyright Alliance speaks with young filmmaker Zachary Maxwell at our Inaugural OneVoi©e Event. He talks about his latest documentary Anatomy of Snow Day, which investigates the complicated decision-making process city officials go through when deciding whether to shut down New York City schools during a snow storm.

The Copyright Alliance speaks with Fordham University theater student Thom Niemann at our Inaugural OneVoi©e Event. He talks about his aspirations as an actor and current opportunities in the entertainment industry. 

The Copyright Alliance speaks with filmmaker and NYU grad Paige Campbell at our Inaugural OneVoi©e Event. She talks about her upcoming film Vanitas, her thoughts about DIY filmmaking, and the state of the industry.

The Copyright Alliance speaks with Grammy-nominated singer/songwriter Valerie Simpson at the 2014 Grammy Foundation’s event recognizing songwriters. Simpson describes the importance of the songwriter in the creation of music and explains how she knows when she has written a good song.

The Copyright Alliance speaks with singer/songwriter Ryan Shaw about his Grammy-nominated cover of the Beatles’s “Yesterday.” Shaw explains music’s ability to transcend time and the important role the Grammy Foundation plays in preserving music for future generations.

Neil Portnow, President of the National Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences, talks to the Copyright Alliance about the academy's core work beyond the Grammy Awards. Portnow explains what the Recording Academy’s role has been in supporting artists amidst the current copyright review process in Congress and concludes by offering advice to artists getting their start within the changing landscape of the music industry.

The Copyright Alliance speaks to saxophonist Mindi Abair at the Recording Academy’s Producers and Engineers Wing event. Mindi describes the work and technical expertise present behind the scenes of the Grammys and the work that the Recording Academy does the rest of the year to support artists and protect their rights.

The Copyright Alliance speaks with up-and-coming Nashville-based band Maybe April at the 2014 Grammy Foundation Songwriters event. Having originally met at Grammy Camp, a music-industry camp organized by the Grammy Foundation, the trio describe how the organization has helped them in pursuing a career in music.

Singer/songwriter and producer, Louise Lynn Goffin takes a moment to talk to the Copyright Alliance at the Recording Academy’s Producers and Engineers Wing event. Goffin speaks about her performance paying tribute to her parents Carole King and Gerry Goffin. Goffin advises young songwriters to find and nurture what makes them unique and to reject any ideas of what they should sound like. 

The Copyright Alliance speaks to singer/songwriter J.D. Souther at the Grammy Foundation 2014 Songwriters event. Souther explains his support of the Grammy Foundation’s focus on music education and music preservation. With respect to his own music, Souther confesses to not ever really knowing whether he has written a good song until after it has been released. He encourages young musicians to take the time to learn their craft and to depend less on illusory media success.  

Singer-songwriter Colbie Callait talks to the Copyright Alliance at the Recording Academy’s Producers and Engineers Wing event. Colbie describes the work that goes into the creation of a song and acknowledges the unseen people behind the music -- the songwriters, engineers, producers, management and labels. She advises aspiring artists to understand the amount of work they must put into being in any creative field.

The Copyright Alliance speaks with songwriter and saxophonist, Boney James, about his latest Grammy nominated album. He acknowledges the role his music educators played in shaping his career and commends the Grammy Foundation for its efforts to bring music education to schools, especially in light of the challenges young musicians face today in the industry.

The Copyright Alliance speaks to Grammy Award Winner Paul Williams about his experience working with Daft Punk on their latest album. In recognition of ASCAP’s 100th year anniversary, Williams expresses his appreciation for the organization and others, including NARAS and the Grammy Foundation, which works to preserve the music, support the rights of musicians, and promote music education in schools.

The Copyright Alliance speaks with the Chairman of the Grammy Foundation, Rusty Rueff about the purpose of the foundation and about the first recipient of the Music Educators Award, Kent Knappenberger. Rueff explains why the inaugural Music Educators Award is of such importance in promoting the overall mission of the Grammy Foundation to preserve the legacy of songwriters, fund music research, and support music education.

Chad Smith, drummer for the Red Hot Chili Peppers, takes a moment to talk to the Copyright Alliance at the Recording Academy’s Producers and Engineers Wing event. Chad describes the role sound engineers and producers play in shaping a finished song and insists that those working hard to create music be recognized and compensated for the work they do.

This is a three-part interview by Terry Hart, Director of Legal Policy at the Copyright Alliance. Terry talks to copyright experts Michael J. Remington, Partner and Nathan Pollard, Associate at Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP and contributing authors to the Telecommunications Law Answer Book 2014 published by Praticising Law Institute, about an array of topics ranging from copyright issues in the digital age to the future of copyright legislation. For more information about the book, please go here. 

This is a three-part interview by Terry Hart, Director of Legal Policy at the Copyright Alliance. Terry talks to copyright experts Michael J. Remington, Partner and Nathan Pollard, Associate at Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP and contributing authors to the Telecommunications Law Answer Book 2014 published by Praticising Law Institute, about an array of topics ranging from copyright issues in the digital age to the future of copyright legislation. For more information about the book, please go here. 

This is a three-part interview by Terry Hart, Director of Legal Policy at the Copyright Alliance. Terry talks to copyright experts Michael J. Remington, Partner and Nathan Pollard, Associate at Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP and contributing authors to the Telecommunications Law Answer Book 2014 published by Praticising Law Institute, about an array of topics ranging from copyright issues in the digital age to the future of copyright legislation. For more information about the book, please go here. 

Terry Hart, Director of Legal Policy at the Copyright Alliance, interviews Dan Phenicie, Executive Producer and Director of Business Development at Seven/Seventy-Nine Group, while attending the NKU Success Strategies for the Professional Arts in the Digital Age event.

Terry Hart, Director of Legal Policy at the Copyright Alliance, interviews Jon Garon, Professor of Law, Director of the NKU Chase Law & Informatics Institute while attending the NKU Success Strategies for the Professional Arts in the Digital Age event.

The average cost to litigate a small copyright infringement lawsuit can easily hit hundreds of thousands of dollars, making it impractical for most independent creators and small businesses to protect their work.  In this, part 3 of a 3 part series, Terry Hart, from Copyright Alliance, interviews Jacquelyn Charlesworth, US Copyright Office about its new report on Copyright Small Claims. 

The average cost to litigate a small copyright infringement lawsuit can easily hit hundreds of thousands of dollars, making it impractical for most independent creators and small businesses to protect their work.  In this, part 2 of a 3 part series, Terry Hart, from Copyright Alliance, interviews Jacquelyn Charlesworth, US Copyright Office about its new report on Copyright Small Claims.

The average cost to litigate a small copyright infringement lawsuit can easily hit hundreds of thousands of dollars, making it impractical for most independent creators and small businesses to protect their work.  In this, part 1 of a 3 part series, Terry Hart, from Copyright Alliance, interviews Jacquelyn Charlesworth, US Copyright Office about its new report on Copyright Small Claims.  

Lucky Dub frontman Gordon Daniels talks about the labor of leading an indie band and about protecting copyrights.

Austin-based guitarist and songwriter John Pointer talks about how it feels to have music ripped off and about his solutionpatronism.com.

Singer/Songwriter David Lowery explains the principle of permission in civilized society.