Earlier this week, a US District Court released an import decision on the legality of music lockers services under US law. In the Capital Records , Inc v MP3Tunes, LLC, 2011 WL 3667335 (S.D.N.Y., Aug 22, 2011) case, the court ruled that MP3Tunes was liable for contributory infringement by providing storage locker services to its users when it knew that they had unlawfully downloaded copyright protected materials into the lockers. MP3Tunes was found liable because it allowed users to continue to store and access songs listed in valid copyright takedown notices. In the summary judgment motions ruled on, the court also held that MP3Tunes was not liable for allowing users to continue to store and access songs it was not required to remove under the DMCA.
Archive for the ‘Reproduction’ category
Are music storage lockers legal in the US?
August 24th, 2011Posted in Copyright, Piracy, Reproduction, p2p piracy, storage lockers
Tags: barry sookman Copyright mp3tunes music storage lockers
Google’s search service exonerated from copyright liability by a French court
January 31st, 2011When Google searches the web and indexes and caches and makes thumbnail copies of visual works available to the public, is it liable for copyright infringement? Also, which country’s copyright laws apply to determining Google’s liability? Is it US law where much of the indexing and caching take place and from where Google transmits thumbnails and links to original works of art to the public? Or is it the place where the thumbnails are viewed (or communicated to)?
These issues were considered by the Paris Court of Appeal in the La société Des Auteurs des Arts Visuels et de L’image Fixe Visual Auteurs (SAIF) v Google France S.A.R.L. and Google Inc case decided last week.
Robertson 2 copyright class action settles
January 18th, 2011The lawyers for Heather Robertson have announced the settlement of the “Robertson 2” class action copyright case. The freelance authors reached a tentative settlement worth more than $5 million with the publisher defendants which include the Toronto Star, Rogers Publishing Limited, CEDROM-SNi Inc., and ProQuest Information and Learning LLC.
The suit alleged that the defendants infringed on the copyrights of the freelance writers by disseminating their articles online without their consent.
There will be a hearing in the Ontario Superior Court on April 11 for the court to consider whether to approve the settlement.
Copyright law 2010 –the year in review in Canada and around the world
January 13th, 2011Here is a copy of the slides I used today at the Law Society of Upper Canada’s Intellectual Property Year in Review conference. The associated paper prepared in collaboration with Glen Bloom, and with the help of others, is available here.
My slides summarize the following copyright cases from Canada, Australia, UK, Ireland, Singapore, Europe and the USA:
Canada
Alberta (Education) v Access Copyright 2010 FCA 198
Bell Canada v SOCAN (Tariff 22) 2010 FCA 220
Canadian Private Copying Collective v. J & E Media Inc., 2010 FC 102
Cheung v. Target Event Production Ltd., 2010 FCA 255
Posted in Copyright, Fair Dealing, Presentations, Reproduction, authorization, communication to the public, fair dealing for education, human rights, idea expression dichotomy
Tags: authorization barry sookman communication to the public Copyright fair dealing Fair Use idea expression dichotomy Reproduction
Federal Court of Appeal decides the Satellite Radio JRs
December 16th, 2010The Federal Court of Appeal released its reasons for decision in two judicial review applications from the Copyright Board’s decision released of April, 2009. Both JR applications were dismissed.
The decision contains several important copyright rulings. In particular:
- When an entity provides a service for use with its own designed and manufactured devices e.g., a satellite radio service and radio receiving set, and the use of the device with the service will necessarily result in automatic copying of the content by the user, the provider of the service (in this case XM and Sirius), can be liable for the copying which occurs on the device under a theory of authorization.
When do broadcasters reproduce works ? The Copyright Board clarifies the law in the Commercial Radio Tariff case
July 18th, 2010The Copyright Board released its reasons for decision in the Commercial Radio Tariff proceedings last week. The case involved many different parties and issues and resulted in the certification of a tariff that covers a gamut of music uses by broadcasters in the course of their operations.
In the course of giving reasons for its decision, the Board made a number of important statements about what constitutes a reproduction for the purposes of the Copyright Act. In particular, the Board canvassed the activities of broadcasters and examined which activities resulted in reproductions of musical works (and sound recordings) in the course of their broadcasting operations.
Posted in Copyright, Reproduction, broadcasting, c-32
Tags: barry sookman broadcasters commercial radio tariff Copyright Reproduction
This site is published by Barry Sookman personally. It is not affiliated with McCarthy Tétrault or any of its clients. Full bio 