{"id":115838,"date":"2016-02-01T14:56:24","date_gmt":"2016-02-01T14:56:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.merindab.com\/private\/2016\/02\/01\/sci-fantasy-fyeahcopyright-today-jan-28\/"},"modified":"2018-09-03T16:46:50","modified_gmt":"2018-09-03T16:46:50","slug":"sci-fantasy-fyeahcopyright-today-jan-28","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.merindab.com\/private\/2016\/02\/01\/sci-fantasy-fyeahcopyright-today-jan-28\/","title":{"rendered":""},"content":{"rendered":"<div id='gallery-1' class='gallery galleryid-115838 gallery-columns-3 gallery-size-thumbnail'><figure class='gallery-item'>\n\t\t\t<div class='gallery-icon landscape'>\n\t\t\t\t<a href='https:\/\/www.merindab.com\/private\/2016\/02\/01\/sci-fantasy-fyeahcopyright-today-jan-28\/attachment\/115839\/'><img width=\"150\" height=\"150\" src=\"https:\/\/www.merindab.com\/private\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/tumblr_o1of24wZqo1s7c5nyo1_500-150x150.gif\" class=\"attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail\" alt=\"\" loading=\"lazy\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.merindab.com\/private\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/tumblr_o1of24wZqo1s7c5nyo1_500-150x150.gif 150w, https:\/\/www.merindab.com\/private\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/tumblr_o1of24wZqo1s7c5nyo1_500-100x100.gif 100w\" sizes=\"100vw\" \/><\/a>\n\t\t\t<\/div><\/figure>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\n<p><a class=\"tumblr_blog\" href=\"http:\/\/sci-fantasy.tumblr.com\/post\/138228193569\" target=\"_blank\">sci-fantasy<\/a>:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p><a class=\"tumblr_blog\" href=\"http:\/\/fyeahcopyright.tumblr.com\/post\/138227890894\" target=\"_blank\">fyeahcopyright<\/a>:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p><figure class=\"tmblr-full\"><img src=\"https:\/\/78.media.tumblr.com\/8b5464ec6efc5413e1ccc5add3f05731\/tumblr_inline_o1oexcrdDE1qj3keq_540.gif\" \/><\/figure>\n<\/p>\n<p>Today (Jan. 28, 2016) the White House released a long-awaited White Paper on <a href=\"http:\/\/www.uspto.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/documents\/copyrightwhitepaper.pdf\" target=\"_blank\">Remixes, First Sale, and Statutory Damages<\/a>\u00a0 in current Copyright Law; part of it draws heavily from the comments submitted last year by the Organization For\u00a0<a>@transformativeworks<\/a> &#8211; and a lot of it quotes multinational rightsholders, copyright\u00a0\u201cprotection\u201d NGOs, professors, think tanks, the EFF and Google; in other words, a lot of views are represented and a number of recommendations are made.\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>Generally, we like what it has to say; it\u2019s informative and it sets forth explanations of some complicated aspects of IP law in plain language that will be useful for lawyers litigating or explaining things, and also for laypeople.\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>Because we are FYeahCopyright, our first read of most of the 100ish pages looked over the remix section, and also the Statutory Damages section. Fair Use is, as we\u2019ve said a number of times, a great way aspect of US copyright law because it allows people to get creative with the stories, images, music and magic that\u2019s inspired them, to create remixes, transformative works, etc. But the risk of statutory damages, which can be considerable, silence innovation and creativity on so many different levels, because of the monetary risk if you think something is fair use &#8211; or public domain &#8211; but you\u2019re wrong (if the standards narrow, for example, or because the law isn\u2019t identical across the US, also see White Paper p.9).\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>The Task Force wants Congress to amend the US Copyright Act &#8211; keep reading to see what they want added to the Statutory Damages section\u2026<\/p>\n<p><b>FACTORS TO CONSIDER \u2013 In making any award under this subsection, a court shall<br \/>\nconsider the following nonexclusive factors in determining the appropriate amount of the<br \/>\naward:\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>The plaintiff\u2019s revenues lost and the difficulty of proving damages.\u00a0<\/li>\n<li>The defendant\u2019s expenses saved, profits reaped, and other benefits from the<br \/>\ninfringement.<\/li>\n<li>The need to deter future infringements.\u00a0<\/li>\n<li>The defendant\u2019s financial situation.\u00a0<\/li>\n<li>The value or nature of the work infringed.\u00a0<\/li>\n<li>The circumstances, duration, and scope of the infringement, including whether it<br \/>\nwas commercial in nature.\u00a0<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Now, we already know that under current Fair Use law, the commercial nature of the follow-on\/transformative work isn\u2019t the sole factor, and it wouldn\u2019t be under the Amended Copyright Act either. And this isn\u2019t law now &#8211; it has to be passed by Congress, but it might be a bipartisan thing that both sides are willing to work on together.\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>So the only thing we\u2019d actually add to this is that it would be awesome if the courts had to look at how the <b>Plaintiff<\/b> benefits from the infringement; does the follow-on work bring new fans to a work or a product or project?\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>Did the infringement cause the Plaintiff to be distracted like Kanye?\u00a0<\/p>\n<figure class=\"tmblr-full\"><img src=\"https:\/\/78.media.tumblr.com\/eab42ef746c8390addef01c728d8c65c\/tumblr_inline_o1oe41mSgW1qj3keq_540.png\" \/><\/figure>\n<p>Did the plaintiff use the follow-on work in any way, like in marketing or promotion of the source-work?\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>It could and should be relevant! \u00a0<\/p>\n<p>If the circumstances of the infringement have to be considered by a court, then if the infringer had reasonably thought that the follow-on work was fair use or otherwise noninfringing, but was wrong, the damages would <i>have to be<\/i>\u00a0lower. Would #4 mean that damages couldn\u2019t be so high as to bankrupt a defendant that wasn\u2019t maliciously counterfeiting a commercial work for commercial purposes? Would an orphan work that\u2019s been out print for decades be seen under #5 as lower-valued and thus less entitled to statutory damages, though fully entitled to the defendant\u2019s profits?\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>Nobody knows yet, but this White Paper is, at least, a framework on what Congress &#8211; and later, the courts &#8211; can set out to reduce some of the chill caused by statutory damages.\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>It\u2019s interesting that the Task Force has chosen to focus on changing the Copyright Act to limit statutory damages, rather than mandate licensing schemes or set out Fair Use guidelines &#8211; and it could have a more positive impact, if the law ever gets amended.\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>A number of commenters noted that statutory damages, which are currently set forth in the Copyright Act, range into the hundreds of thousands of dollars, and even the prospect of obtaining those damages from a defendant can keep litigation going on until a defendant &#8211; even one who is noninfringing &#8211; has been bankrupted by a perpetual lawsuit. The risk of statutory damages chills corporate innovation and original creativity, keeping from the public new works of art, literature and music, and detering \u201csome new business plans that rely on fair use from moving forward.\u201d Of course, some rights-holder-centric groups disputed it, but we all know people who\u2019ve pulled stories and art, or avoided a cosplay project or had something removed from YouTube or etsy because someone thought it was infringing, even if it was actually noninfringing because of Fair Use.<\/p>\n<p>ProjectDisco blogged about this more <a href=\"http:\/\/www.project-disco.org\/intellectual-property\/012816-commerce-task-force-recommends-reforming-copyright-statutory-damage\/\" target=\"_blank\">here<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>For the past three years, some have wondered if the White Paper would include a recommendation for a new mandatory licensing system for music, books, art, etc, but the White Paper notes that the commentators do not \u201cbelieve it advisable to<br \/>\ncreate a new exception or a compulsory license.\u201d This is good for Fair Use, because as the Paper states:\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><i><b> It is important that the copyright framework continues to allow the broad<br \/>\nrange of remixes to thrive, ensuring that a vibrant fair use space coexists with effective licensing<br \/>\nstructures.\u00a0<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n<p>The Task Force will not recommend \u201cabandoning the multifactor approach of fair use \u2026[because]\u2026 fair use, which requires consideration<br \/>\nof the purpose of the use, the nature of the copyrighted work, the amount of the work used, and<br \/>\nits effect on the market or potential market, represents a nuanced and balanced approach that has<br \/>\nworked well in the United States. (White Paper, p. 25)<\/p>\n<p>They also will not mandate guidelines on what is and is not Fair Use, and here\u2019s why:\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><b><i> Best practices and<br \/>\nguidelines cannot be comprehensive codes enumerating everything that can be done in a<br \/>\nparticular realm of activity.\u00a0<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n<p><b><i>A more modest endeavor, aiming to identify what conduct can be<br \/>\nagreed on as permissible or impermissible, can serve a valuable function. Such a process would<br \/>\nleave gaps in that there will be some conduct as to which no guidance is offered, either because<br \/>\nthe fair use status is too unclear or because stakeholders hold divergent views. This does not<br \/>\nmean that the outcome is not worthwhile.<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n<p>Page 29 sets forth some ideas for guidelines creation, and it\u2019ll be interesting to see if those steps and recs are followed between fans and The Powers That Be. Fwiw, it looks like we\u2019ll be sticking around to continue to explain Fair Use and its parameters &#8211; we\u2019re pretty happy about that!<\/p>\n<p>Google\u2019s Fred Von Loehmann noted that amateur creators such as those starting out on YouTube often<br \/>\nwant to become professionals, but may find it difficult to negotiate the transition from amateur to<br \/>\nprofessional given the different \u201cclearance culture\u201d in the professional world.\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>We wonder if this Task Force White Paper might have some impact on that transition; if it\u2019s less (financially) risky to share your creativity, will those giving clearance become less risk-averse and more open to arguments that a specific work is Fair Use and thus noninfringing?\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>Let\u2019s see what comes next. \u00a0<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<figure class=\"tmblr-full\"><img src=\"https:\/\/78.media.tumblr.com\/5c6dd326e049fdc91f4fb05604b60b64\/tumblr_inline_o1oew8LMLl1qj3keq_540.jpg\" \/><\/figure>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>I need to read this (the whitepaper) once I have time.<\/p>\n<p>Whenever that is.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>sci-fantasy: fyeahcopyright: Today (Jan. 28, 2016) the White House released a long-awaited White Paper on Remixes, First Sale, and Statutory Damages\u00a0 in current Copyright Law; part of it draws heavily from the comments submitted last year by the Organization For\u00a0@transformativeworks &#8211; and a lot of it quotes multinational rightsholders, copyright\u00a0\u201cprotection\u201d NGOs, professors, think tanks, the &hellip; <\/p>\n<p class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.merindab.com\/private\/2016\/02\/01\/sci-fantasy-fyeahcopyright-today-jan-28\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"gallery","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[7458,4],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.merindab.com\/private\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/115838"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.merindab.com\/private\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.merindab.com\/private\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.merindab.com\/private\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.merindab.com\/private\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=115838"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.merindab.com\/private\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/115838\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":115840,"href":"https:\/\/www.merindab.com\/private\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/115838\/revisions\/115840"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.merindab.com\/private\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=115838"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.merindab.com\/private\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=115838"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.merindab.com\/private\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=115838"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}