All Entries in the "Media" Category
The era of intellectual property law
By Matthew B. Harrison
SPRINGFIELD, Mass. –– In a recent article, Michael Harrison predicted that Intellectual Property Law would dominate talk radio’s legal concerns in the era that is unfolding. (It is filed at www.talkers.com under Michael Harrison and is titled “The Ticking of the Clock.”)
As talk programming evolves into new means of digital distribution through advances in technology, so does our need to understand intellectual property. While evolutionary, the nature of the rights themselves –– to control and exploit the products of one’s creativity and innovation –– remains consistent, the manner by which they are expressed and exchanged is constantly attempting to adapt to advances in technology.
The invention of, in turn, the printing press, the phonograph, radio and television broadcasting, cable, transmission from satellite, VCRs, CDs, DVDs, and now the internet has affected both the form and the substance in the interpretation of intellectual property rights.
Rihanna settles with LaChapelle
Pop singer Rihanna has settled the copyright dispute with photographer David LaChapelle. LaChapelle had claimed the music video for the singer’s single ‘S&M’ contained elements similar enough to his photos for it to infringe his copyright. In July a New York judge rejected Rihanna’s lawyer’s attempts to have the case dismissed on the basis of ‘fair use.’ Terms of the settlement were not made public.
Copyright News Roundup
Copyright News Update:
Rapper 50 Cent has another notch in his court battle belt as a federal judge in Newark dismissed an infringement allegation against both himself and his record label, G-Unit.
The plaintiff, author Shadrach Winstead, claimed the rapper plagiarized his book, The Preacher’s Son – But the Streets Have Turned Me Into a Gangster, directly ripping off elements for 50 Cent’s 2009 movie and album of the same name, Before I Self Destruct.
According to 50 Cent’s legal team, the judge tossed the case after determining that the only genuine similarities between the works were a main character that came up on the mean streets of Newark. Phrases that were arguably points of contention were deemed common and not infringement worthy.
…
Matthew David Howard Smith, 23, of Raleigh, North Carolina, pleaded guilty in Virginia federal court for copyright infringement. Upon sentencing (December 16th, 2011) he faces up to five years in prison for each count.
According to court documents, Smith was a founder of NinjaVideo, which operated from February 2008 until it was shut down by law enforcement in June 2010.
The site enabled visitors to illegally download movies and television programs still in theaters or that had yet to be released.
Users were asked to make donations to the site, which provided access to private forums that contained, more material for download. Officials said the operators allegedly collected more than $500,000 during the website’s two-and-a-half years of operation.
The Idea / Expression Dichotomy
By Matthew B. Harrison
SPRINGFIELD, Mass. –– Good talk radio hosts draw upon multiple sources for material. News, media, pop culture and their own lives and interests are standard sources for talking points. In today’s digital world two pressing legal questions should be on your mind:
1) How difficult is it to infringe upon someone’s copyright when borrowing a concept, the goodwill, or even actual pieces from someone else’s work?
2) How difficult is it to protect your own work from having others use too much?
Copyright protection is only available for the expression of ideas and not the ideas themselves. This is known as the idea/expression dichotomy.
The “idea” is to, say, do a show on conservative political issues. The idea, furthermore, is to spin (or “position”) an issue in a particular way as to highlight a thought-provoking point. The protectable “expression” is the recording of the segment in which you make the point. While you may have been the first person to make such a point, only your exact expression is protected and other –– perhaps not as talented –– hosts can run with the idea their own way as they see fit.
Putting it out there without giving it away
By Matthew B. Harrison, Esq.
Photos & The Law dot com
as originally published in issue 219 of TALKERS magazine
SPRINGFIELD, MA — On May 16th, at 6:30 am Stefanie Gordon boarded a Delta flight from New York to Palm Beach. Somewhere along the flight, out the window of her airplane seat, she took a photo, tweeted it to friends when she landed, and then headed off to spend the day with her father. Gordon’s now-famous photo of the space shuttle Endeavour soaring through the clouds got her an overwhelming amount of attention but also landed her smack in the middle of an ethical and legal debate inherent to the future of the internet.
The photo was viewed nearly one million times, and has been showed by hundreds of news outlets around the world. She was paid by precisely five news organizations.
Understanding Audio Content Ownership Rights
by Matthew B. Harrison, Esq.
Harrison Legal Group
SPRINGFIELD, Mass. –– Understanding ownership rights of audio content is one of the more common issues to cross my desk. While most of the information that exists on the topic, including court cases and their analysis, is centered on music-based audio, the rules can be similarly applied to both spoken- or music-based content. Therefore, this article will examine the application of such rules to music and aptly apply them to spoken-word content.
A work made for hire is defined as a work created by an employee within the scope of the employee’s employment. A work made for hire can also be created by a contractual agreement between two parties.
Take success into consideration
Take success into consideration
by Matthew B. Harrison, Esq.
SPRINGFIELD, Mass — A key aspect of my job as a manager of talent and attorney is to development plans that not only include business and legal components but also take into account the possibility that the projects we are planning might, in fact, become successful. If the pursuit of success is what drives us – then shouldn’t we have a plan that takes the possibility of success into consideration? This is especially important when things involve other people, facilities owned by employers, components from the internet, and so many potential legal and ethical entanglements. It is amazing how often people don’t stop and consider this went entering into plans.
Consider this recent example that dominated twitter trending the past few weeks:
Rebecca Black, 13, recorded a song and music video (called “Friday”) in collaboration with a company specializing in vanity productions. Black’s parents contributed financially to the project, to ensure that they retained all rights in the song and the video, along with the original masters (as allegedly detailed in their initial contract).
The importance of registering copyright
The importance of registering copyright
By Matthew B. Harrison
NEW YORK –– Copyright law protects your intellectual property immediately upon the fixation of a creative work in a tangible form. However, in many circumstances it is desirable to additionally register your works with the United States Copyright Office; especially if you want to maintain the ability to sue for significant damages.
Although copyright attaches to a particular work upon its fixation in a tangible media (a tape, a CD, a file, etc.), you cannot actually sue someone for infringing your copyright until you have registered your work with the Copyright Office. One can always register the copyright just prior to suing, however there is a major advantage to registering the copyright within three months from the date of first publication, or at least prior to the date of infringement: The ability to collect statutory damages. If you do not register your copyright within three months of initial publication, or before the date of the infringement, one would only be eligible for actual damages –– which are difficult to prove and may only be nominal in amount.
To see how this plays out, assume that I have created an amazing spoken-word audio program and posted it on a website without registering the copyright. Since the audio program is an original work fixed in a tangible form (a playable file) it is protected by copyright. Therefore, if someone from another website comes and copies the file and places it on their website, my copyright has been infringed. In order for me to sue, I need to register the file with the Copyright Office.
Be careful what you post on websites that sell advertising
Be careful what you post on websites that sell advertising
by Matthew B. Harrison, Esq.
NEW YORK –– Most of us have seen the recent YouTube clip of a woman falling into a fountain at a mall while texting (now dubbed “the fountain lady”). This bit of slapstick reality has attracted millions of views, many duplicates, and even commentaries, remixes and faux interviews. It’s another viral video success and those who boarded that train early are even making money from the ad revenues. But is it legal?
The background involves some mall security employees posting video footage of a fellow female employee falling into a fountain online, while sharing their own “director” commentary while they playback and repeat the video from their security office. With more than three million views in less than two weeks, it spawned many other YouTube videos with their own commentary and creativity. Radio has certainly picked up the story and generated its own share of commentary both on the air and on the web. The identity of the woman was –– at this point –– unknown to the public.
However, this changed when the employee “outed” herself as the person featured in the video. She is threatening lawsuit that someone in security should have come to her rescue instead of laughing at her misfortune. One lesson is quite clear –– it’s easy to be so consumed in our digital devices that we fail to pay attention to our physical surroundings.
Old law applied to new media could spell trouble for terrestrial radio
NEW YORK — As media technology advances, our legal system tends to lag behind. Old rules governing new situations as interpreted by judges who aren’t exactly on the leading edge of these advances, is often a recipe for disaster. To apply existing rules to the internet requires a liberal (as in “not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas”) interpretation. This same interpretation as it could then be applied to terrestrial radio could prove problematic.
In New York, defamation suits revolve around what the average person reading or hearing a communication would take an alleged “false statement of fact” to mean.
The average person, at the time this law was drafted, was probably a very active terrestrial media consumer. However, now with the courts being inundated with internet based communications matters, the average person who is consuming internet media is becoming the standard in which all rules apply.