Podcasts about orphan works

Internet, technology, and property scholar James Grimmelmann joins us to discuss, among other things, the fight over the Google Books settlement, modern Libraries of Alexandria, and the nature of the legal academic mission. This show’s links: James Grimmelmann’s wesbite (http://james.grimmelmann.net) (containing links to his scholarship, courses, blog, and more) Cornell Tech (https://tech.cornell.edu) James Somers, Torching the Modern-Day Library of Alexandria (https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/04/the-tragedy-of-google-books/523320/) James Grimmelmann, Future Conduct and the Limits of Class-Action Settlements (http://james.grimmelmann.net/files/articles/future-conduct.pdf) For many resources on the Google Books case and settlement, visit the site James and his students created: thepublicindex.org (http://www.thepublicindex.org) Authors Guild v. Google (https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2220742578695593916); Authors Guild v. HathiTrust (https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4571528653505160061) Sony Corp. v. Universal Studios (https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5876335373788447272) About A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A%26M_Records,_Inc._v._Napster,_Inc.) Video from the panel discussion (https://archive.org/details/Orphanworksandmassdigitization20120412) at UC Berkeley’s April 2012 Orphan Works and Mass Digitization Conference diybookscanner.org (https://diybookscanner.org) Internet Archive Books (https://archive.org/details/internetarchivebooks) Vernor Vinge, Rainbow’s End (https://www.amazon.com/Rainbows-End-Vernor-Vinge/dp/0812536363) About shotgun sequencing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shotgun_sequencing), the DNA sequencing method used by Celera Genomics to sequence the human genome in 2000 James Grimmelmann, Scholars, Teachers, and Servants (https://james.grimmelmann.net/files/articles/scholars-teachers-servants.pdf) New York Law School’s In re Books Conference (http://www.nyls.edu/innovation-center-for-law-and-technology/iilp-archive/iilp-conferences/in_re_books/) Special Guest: James Grimmelmann.

Orphan works can be any creative works - from photographs to letters, music to books, film to paintings. The UK Orphan Works Licensing scheme helps reunite us with our hidden cultural treasures and enable individuals and organisations to use and share these works in more ways. Margaret Haig from the IPO's Copyright team joins Christopher Smith to talk about orphan works, history, and rediscovering our cultural heritage. Be the first to hear our latest podcasts by signing up for #IP4biz e-alerts now: bit.ly/ip4bizalerts

Welcome to episode 36!  Consider subscribing if you haven’t already. In this episode:00:01:00 – Want a FREE portfolio review by me (Sharky James)? Want to win a super fast 64GB Lexar 1000x SDXC card? How about a $100 or $1,000 Amazon.com Gift Card? Visit this page for details: http://www.LensShark.com/contests # # # 00:03:21 – This week’s Listener Question comes from Sergio in Ohio. Sergio has a Nikon D200, but wants to know if he should move up to the Nikon D700 or go mirrorless with the awesome Fujifilm X-T1.   # # # 00:12:09 – Adobe’s Dehaze slider in Lightroom and Adobe Camera RAW seems to also do wonder with the night’s sky and astrophotography. # # # 00:13:14 – Google gets ready to yank Google+ Photos…what you need to know. # # # 00:14:03 – Flickr brings back the Pro level of membership due to popular demand. # # # 00:15:03 – Canon reports huge losses in the Q2 of 2015. What does this mean for the camera maker? # # # 00:20:30 – Sony’s RX100 IV does an amazing 1000 frames per second and you need to see the video by our friends at MirrorLessons.com. # # # 00:22:11 – LumoPro innovates with a cool flash case called the LumoPro LP742 LightSwitch which doubles as three flash modifiers. # # # 00:23:22 – A Fresno, California photographer is killed as he is hit by a train while doing a photoshoot on the tracks. # # # 00:24:58 – Still shooting film? What you need to know if you’re dropping rolls of film off at Walgreens, CVS, Walmart and others for processing. # # # 00:27:38 – Taylor Swift’s rights-grabbing contract gets reworked by the photography industry and Swift accepts the more reasonable contract. Another victory in the war on photography! # # # 00:30:13 – It looks like once again, the government is looking to push through an “Orphan Works” act. What you, as a photographer, needs to know about your diminished copyright should this pass. # # # In Drone News:00:36:19 – A foolish Connecticut man attaches a gun to a drone and flies it causing quite an uproar. You must see the video. # # # 00:38:09 – After quite a few irresponsible drone owners causing firefighting aircraft to be grounded due to safety concerns, California legislators introduce a bill allowing emergency personnel to knock drones out of the sky for their safety. We’re calling on drone manufactures to warn its customers about flying near the scenes of emergencies. Announcement:Free eBook!  –  The Lens Shark Quickstart Guide to Perfect Exposure. Announcement:Free camera giveaway coming up!The winner’s choice of a Nikon D750, Canon 7D Mark II or Sony A7s! Listener questions needed:Click the link for the podcast and leave us an audio question to have a good chance to get on the show. Alternatively, you can post your questions on our site or via social media. ###  Please consider subscribing if you haven’t done so already, leave me a review and check me out on social media at the links below.  ### Facebook:  http://www.facebook.com/LensShark/ Twitter:  http://www.twitter.com/LensShark/ Pinterest:  http://www.pinterest.com/LensShark/ Instagram:  http://www.instagram.com/LensShark/   The post Episode 36: Nikon or Fujifilm…Which Would You Choose? [LSP #0036] appeared first on Lens Shark Photography Podcast.

March 11, 2014. Several foreign countries have laws that address mass digitization in different ways. Speakers discussed the option of extended collective licensing for purposes of mass digitization in detail and whether the United States should look abroad to foreign extended collective licensing approaches for ideas on domestic action on the issue of mass digitization. Karyn Temple Claggett, Catherine Rowland, Gregory Barnes, Brandon Butler, Jan Constantine, Mike Furlough, Ariel Katz, Debra LaKind, Jim Mahoney, Corynne McSherry, Casey Rae, Lauri Rechardt, Colin Rushing, Jerker Ryden, Frederic Schroeder, Ben Sheffner, Michael Weinberg and Cynthia Turner. For transcript, captions, and more information, visit http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/feature_wdesc.php?rec=6452

March 11, 2014. Although mass digitization was ongoing in 2008, the practice has since become much more prevalent. Thus, it is important to understand how mass digitization fits into an orphan works solution. Because many of the comments submitted in response to the Notice indicated that the issue of mass digitization should be treated separately from the issue of orphan works, it also is important to understand whether mass digitization fits into an orphan works solution. The Copyright Office discussed the intersection of mass digitization and orphan works at the public roundtable meetings, the types of digitization projects that should be covered by any legislative proposal, the relative risks and benefits of mass digitization projects, the types of entities that might be able to engage in such activities under any legislative proposal, and the types or categories of works that should be covered. Karyn Temple Claggett, Catherine Rowland, Frank Muller, Jan Constantine, Jonathan Band, June Besek, Richard Burgess, Michael W. Carroll, Blane Dessy, Melissa Levine, Andrew McDiarmid, Corynne McSherry, Mickey Osterreicher, Brooke Penrose, Janice T. Pilch, Leah Prescott, Jerker Ryden and Ben Sheffner. For transcript, captions, and more information, visit http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/feature_wdesc.php?rec=6451

March 11, 2014. Audience members were invited to give their final comments regarding the two-day Orphan Works roundtables. Karyn Temple Claggett, Catherine Rowland, Lisa Shaftel, Jean Dryden, Jeff Sedlik, John Sadowski, Nancy C. Prager, Mike Furlough, Greg Cram, Brooke Penrose and Hope O'Keeffe, Michael Capobianco. For transcript, captions, and more information, visit http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/feature_wdesc.php?rec=6454

March 11, 2014. The Copyright Office's 2006 Report did not suggest creation of an exception to copyright for use of orphan works, but instead recommended that Congress limit the remedies that the copyright owner could seek against good faith users of orphan works to injunctive relief and "reasonable compensation" for the use of the work. The appropriate structure and scope of remedies continues to be a significant issue of concern for both copyright owners and potential users of orphan works. During this panel discussion, remedies and procedures in the context of orphan works were discussed by Karyn Temple Claggett, Catherine Rowland, Patrick Boyle, Richard Burgess, Greg Cram, Emily Feltren, Elizabeth Townsend Gard, Ann F. Hoffman, Ariel Katz, Lee Knife, Nancy Kopans, James Love, Maria D. Matthews, Mickey Osterreicher, Salley Shannon, Chuck Slocum and Michael Weinberg. For transcript, captions, and more information, visit http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/feature_wdesc.php?rec=6450

March 11, 2014. Panelists discussed specific details of an appropriate extended collective licensing system in the United States for mass digitization purposes. While some other countries have embraced extended collective licensing, the United States currently does not have the legal framework for such a system. It is unclear, however, how extended collective licensing could integrate with the current U.S. legal infrastructure to streamline the licensing process, or whether it could possibly upset existing and well-functioning markets for certain copyright-protected works. Moreover, the mechanical operation of such a system is unclear; for example, questions remain regarding procedures whereby copyright rights holders may "opt out" of any extended collective licensing regime. Karyn Temple Claggett, Catherine Rowland, Gregory Barnes, Brandon Butler, Susan Chertkof, Carrie Devorah, Frederic Haber, Douglas Hill, Ariel Katz, Bruce Lehman, Sarah Michalak, Victor Perlman, Janice T. Pilch, Casey Rae, Colin Rushing, Jerker Ryden, Salley Shannon and Gregory Scott Stein. For transcript, captions, and more information, visit http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/feature_wdesc.php?rec=6453

March 10, 2014. The U.S. Copyright Office is reviewing the problem of orphan works under U.S. copyright law in continuation of its previous work on the subject and to advise Congress on possible next steps for the United States. The Office has long shared the concern with many in the copyright community that the uncertainty surrounding the ownership status of orphan works does not serve the objectives of the copyright system. For good faith users, orphan works are a frustration, a liability risk, and a major cause of gridlock in the digital marketplace. The issue is not contained to the United States. Indeed, a number of foreign governments have recently adopted or proposed solutions. Speakers during session one included Karyn Temple Claggett, Catherine Rowland, Allan Adler, Jonathan Band, June Besek, Kyle K. Courtney, Emily Feltren, David Hansen, James Hare, Ann F. Hoffman, Brad Holland, Jamie Love, Jim Mahoney, Janice T. Pilch, Jay Rosenthal, Matthew Schruers and Salley Shannon. For transcript, captions, and more information, visit http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/feature_wdesc.php?rec=6315

March 10, 2014. In its 2006 Report, the Copyright Office recommended that Congress amend the Copyright Act to limit the remedies available against good faith users of orphan works after the user performed a generally "reasonably diligent search" to locate the owner of that work. The 2008 bills set forth certain baseline requirements such as searching the Office's online records, and would have required users to consult best practices applicable to the work at issue. Both copyright owners and users would have participated in developing these best practices, which the Register of Copyrights would have coordinated. During this session, participants discussed how best to define a good faith, reasonably diligent search in light of changes in the legal and technological environment since 2008, and whether improvements can be made to the standard set forth in the 2008 bills. Speakers included Karyn Temple Claggett, Catherine Rowland, Michael Capobianco, Krista Cox, Greg Cram, Alec French, Eric Harbeson, Ann F. Hoffman, Meredith Jacob, Kurt R. Klaus, Jack Lerner, Sarah Michalak, Nancy C. Prager, Jay Rosenthal, Carrie Russell, Amy Sabrin, Ben Sheffner and Nancy Wolff. For transcript, captions, and more information, visit http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/feature_wdesc.php?rec=6316

March 10, 2014. The Copyright Office's previous orphan works review did not differentiate between commercial and noncommercial uses and users of orphan works. Since then, however, there has been a debate regarding whether an orphan works solution should take into account the user's status as either a commercial or noncommercial entity. For example, the E.U. Orphan Works Directive provides an exception for noncommercial public interest users making noncommercial public interest uses of orphan works. Any solution that excludes commercial users and uses, however, may arguably provide an incomplete solution. Some have argued that the policy motivations behind any orphan works legislation logically should extend to commercial uses that may promote the underlying goals of the Copyright Act. The United Kingdom's recently adopted orphan works legislation does not differentiate between commercial and noncommercial users or uses. The Office thus is interested in learning more about whether an orphan works solution should encompass both commercial and noncommercial uses. Karyn Temple Claggett, Catherine Rowland, Alan Adler, Michael W. Carroll, Dan Cohen, Daniel Collier, Kyle K. Courtney, Krista Cox, Anne Collins Goodyear, Jodie Griffin, Nancy Kopans, Leah Prescott, Manon Ress, Lisa Shaftel and Chuck Slocum. For transcript, captions, and more information, visit http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/feature_wdesc.php?rec=6319

March 10, 2014. As described in the Office's previous Notice and many of the responding comments, orphan works remain a pervasive issue in copyright law. While the issue cuts across all creative sectors, the unique challenges posed by photographs have long been an obstacle to developing an effective orphan works solution. Photographs and other works of visual art may lack or may more easily become divorced from ownership information, especially in the age of social media that has largely transpired since Congress considered the 2008 bills. This lack of identifying information often prevents users from locating or even initiating a search for orphaned photographs' rights holders. The 2008 bills included a number of provisions specifically aimed at resolving some of the issues specific to photographs. This panel discussed how to address the problems presented by certain types of works, including specifically photographic and visual arts orphan works. Speakers included Karyn Temple Claggett, Catherine Rowland, Robert Kasunik, Dan Cohen, Rachel Fertig, Alec French, Anne Collins Goodyear, David Hansen, Bruce Lehman, Maria D. Matthews, Alex McGehee, Eugene Mopsik, Barbara Natanson, Mickey Osterreicher, Kelly Rogers, Jay Rosenthal, Charles Sanders, Jeff Sedlik and Lisa Shaftel. For transcript, captions, and more information, visit http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/feature_wdesc.php?rec=6318

March 10, 2014. One question regarding orphan works is the role public and private registries might play in any orphan works solution. The most obvious of these registries, the Copyright Office's own registration and recordation system, provides a wealth of copyright information but has limitations based on both technological requirements and the fact that registration and recordation is not mandatory in the United States. There are other registries that have ownership information, and there has been some suggestion that the Office should investigate enhancing interoperability between the Office system and private rights registries. The Office discussed the role registration and recordation may play in helping to more effectively mitigate the orphan works problem. Speakers included Karyn Temple Claggett, Catherine Rowland, Robert Kasunik, Michael Capobianco, Megan Gray, Eric Harbeson, Douglas Hill, Brad Holland, Roy Kaufman, Patrick McCormack, Alex McGehee, Eugene Mopsik, Nancy Prager, Colin Rushing, Frederic Schroeder, Matthew Schruers, Jeff Sedlik and Nancy Wolff. For transcript, captions, and more information, visit http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/feature_wdesc.php?rec=6317

Suffolk University, Suffolk University Law School, Boston, Copyright Law, Mass Book Digitization, Copyright, Intellectual Property, Intellectual Property Law, Copyright Policy, Orphan Works, Copyright Clause, Google Books, Project Gutenberg

In this episode, noted intellectual property and publishing lawyer Professor Tonya Evans discusses whether it is OK to use other people's copyrighted work without permission when it is difficult or impossible to locate the owner. This issue is also known as the "orphan works" problem and was addressed recently by the Copyright Office and Congress.

Coffee House to Go episode #31.Coffee House to Go is a Podcast for writers and the Small Press community.Opening music excerpt by Uma Floresta, "Almost Everything."Your Host:LB Sedlacek - The Poetry Market E-zine and lbsedlacek.comShow Topics:> The SAA Orphan Works Blog> Orphan WorksLinks to Know:> LB on TwitterClosing music excerpt by Simpatico, "Santa Claudia"Subscribe to our Podcast Feed orDownload the show here! Play Now: CHTG-031-091508 (6'50 3.1mb 64kbps)

Guest: Alex Curtis of Public Knowledge In this episode, Colette interviews Alex Curtis, of Public Knowledge, a Washington-based advocacy group, about Orphan Works. Orphan Works is a problem in copyright law that Congress is trying to solve through newly proposed legislation. Alex provides us with some background on the problem, an overview of the different sides to the issue, and Public Knowledge's position on the pending legislation. The discussion covers views that are critical and in favor of the new legislation.

Defenses

There's a cultural war going on that IMHO is far more determinative for our future than the superficial one being waged by the christian right against islam - a battle for our ability to communicate with one another creatively and interactively with the products of our shared culture. Todays vlogpost is a remix of the cover image from Lawrence Lessig's book, Free Culture some creative commons images, and Lost in the plot from The Dears, who took the SXSW festival this year by storm. Lessig talks, in the opening paragraphs of this phenomenal book about "Disney creativity,"--a form of expression and genius that builds upon the culture around us and makes it something different. Disney (or Disney, Inc.) ripped creativity from the culture around him, mixed that creativity with his own extraordinary talent, and then burned that mix into the soul of his culture. Rip, mix, and burn. Most of the content from the nineteenth century was free for Disney to use and build upon in 1928. It was free for anyone--whether connected or not, whether rich or not, whether approved or not--to use and build upon, without permission. Yet today, the public domain is presumptive only for content from before the Great Depression. Lessig has been instrumental in the Orphan Works project as well, and is probably the most important contemporary legal activists fighting to maintain a common culture, and therefore our ability to collectively communicate with each other via the powerful tools that have been put on our desktop. As noted by Tom Sherman in 1996, "We are willing participants in the creation of a second nature. While the biological world is collapsing, we are busy constructing an elaborate media environment." Lets hope this environment wont collapse as well.

There's a cultural war going on that IMHO is far more determinative for our future than the superficial one being waged by the christian right against islam - a battle for our ability to communicate with one another creatively and interactively with the products of our shared culture. Todays vlogpost is a remix of the cover image from Lawrence Lessig's book, Free Culture some creative commons images, and Lost in the plot from The Dears, who took the SXSW festival this year by storm.Lessig talks, in the opening paragraphs of this phenomenal book about "Disney creativity,"--a form of expression and genius that builds upon the culture around us and makes it something different. Disney (or Disney, Inc.) ripped creativity from the culture around him, mixed that creativity with his own extraordinary talent, and then burned that mix into the soul of his culture. Rip, mix, and burn. Most of the content from the nineteenth century was free for Disney to use and build upon in 1928. It was free for anyone--whether connected or not, whether rich or not, whether approved or not--to use and build upon, without permission. Yet today, the public domain is presumptive only for content from before the Great Depression. Lessig has been instrumental in the Orphan Works project as well, and is probably the most important contemporary legal activists fighting to maintain a common culture, and therefore our ability to collectively communicate with each other via the powerful tools that have been put on our desktop.As noted by Tom Sherman in 1996, "We are willing participants in the creation of a second nature. While the biological world is collapsing, we are busy constructing an elaborate media environment."Lets hope this environment wont collapse as well.