Public Policy Connections

UCLA Streaming Video Case Dismissed

On October 3, 2011, the United States District Court in California dismissed a lawsuit charging UCLA with violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and other provisions of copyright law. The Ambrose Video and the Association for Informational Media and Equipment (AIME) lawsuit challenged UCLA's practice of streaming previously purchased video content for educational purposes. The ruling suggests that educational institutions are entitled to stream legally purchased DVDs on campus without the permission of copyright holders.

Read More:
UCLA Streaming Video Case Dismissed
DMCA allows DVD ripping if you own the DVD

Google Books Settlement Rejected

The Open Book Alliance, of which SLA is a member, applauded the rejection of Google Books Settlement. The New York Federal District Court’s rejection of the Google Book Settlement is a victory for the public interest and for competition in the literary and Internet ecosystems.  In his decision, Judge Denny Chin confirmed that the proposed settlement “would give Google a de facto monopoly over unclaimed works” and concluded that the proposed settlement “is not fair, adequate, and reasonable.” In his conclusion, Judge Chin gave voice to the authors and creators who have long opposed this proposed settlement by urging the parties to consider revising the settlement to an “opt-in” structure.

Read More:

New York Times : Judge Rejects Google’s Deal to Digitize Books

Computer Weekly.com:  Open Book Alliance welcomes court ruling on Google book plan

European Commission Wants 7-Year Limit on Works Digitized by Google

On January 10, 2010, the European Commission released a report on Europeana, the E.U.’s digital library project, that made a number of recommendations designed to strengthen and grow the project with an eye towards creating a single public portal through which users could access Europe’s cultural heritage in a digital format. 

Specifically, the report called  for a more than 50% reduction in the duration of the exclusivity deals that Google signs with libraries, from 15 years to 7 years.  Among other recommendations, the report states that members states must considerably increase funding for digitization in order to make the Europeana portal the “central reference point for Europe’s online cultural heritage, that rules for “orphan works” must be finalized quickly, and that “cultural institutions must have a window of opportunity to digitize material and make it available to the public” with renumeration for rights holders.

Read more: Open Book Alliance article EC Digitization Report: Stronger Rules for Google Books

Read more: New York Times article  Brussels Wants 7-Year Limit on Works Digitized by Google  

Organizations Urge Supreme Court to Preserve First Sale Doctrine for Imports

SLA joined several other organizations in filing an amicus (friend of the court) brief with the Supreme Court asking it to reverse a decision that Costco was infringing upon copyright by selling genuine Omega watches without the watchmaker’s permission.

Omega sued Costco for selling genuine Omega watches at a discount, basing their claim on the idea that a small, copyrighted design stamped on the back of the watch was being infringed upon when Costco sold the watches. Ordinarily, copyright law’s first sale doctrine holds that the owner of a copy of a work can distribute it as he or she likes. However, Omega claimed that this limitation on copyright did not apply because the watches were not made in the United States.

The brief, filed 8 July 2010, was joined by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the American Free Trade Association, the American Association of Law Libraries, the Medical Library Association, and the Special Libraries Association.

Read News Story: Can you sell your imported gadgets? Court guts "First Sale"

Is Less-Than-Perfect Information a Liability?

Nicholas Carr, who will be SLA 2010 keynote speaker on Wednesday, 16 June in New Orleans, asks “Are Google Maps and GPS bad for our brains?” in Sunday’s Washington Post. Carr talks about a woman who was hit by a car while crossing a four-lane highway in January 2009. More than a year after the accident, she filed a lawsuit against Google, claiming that the route for her walk had been suggested by Google Maps. The lawsuit asks for more than $100,000 in damages, in part to cover medical bills.

That has to make you wonder: Is less-than-perfect information a liability? Can you hold a party liable for the use, or misuse, of reasonably good information? Carr’s new book, The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains, was also just reviewed by the New York Times, and the subject of a Q & A in the Times “Paper Cut” blog.

I’m looking forward to hearing in person what Nicholas Carr has to say in The Big Easy next week in New Orleans!

Read the Washington Post article, “Are Google Maps and GPS bad for our brains?” (6 June 2010)

Read New York Times “Paper Cut” Blog, “Questions for: Nicholas Carr” (4 June 2010)

Read New York Times Book Review, “Our Cluttered Minds” (27 May 2010)

European Commission to Ask for Public Input on Net Neutrality

Speaking at a conference held by French telecoms regulator ARCEP, the European Commissioner for Digital Agenda, Neelie Kroes, said the Internet is "not an inherently neutral platform."This means that European regulators have to make choices about whether to allow ISPs to prioritize certain types of online traffic. The European Commission will ask the public for their thoughts on Net neutrality in the upcoming months.

"Net neutrality is a subject that stirs emotions," Kroes said, adding that the debate had seen people voice fears over government censorship and the increasing commercialization of the Web.

The U.S. is addressing the same types of Net Neutrality issues. In early April, a U.S. federal appeals court ruled that regulators had limited power over Web traffic under current law. Argued on 8 January 2010, the ruling on the Comcast vs. the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will allow Internet service companies to block or slow specific sites and charge video sites to deliver faster content to users.

Read article on ZDNet UK: Internet is 'not inherently neutral,' says EU's Kroes

EU Parliament Votes against ACTA; Threatens Legal Action

The European Parliament voted 663 to 13 against the secret Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). The parliamentarians defied the EU executive and threatened to take the issue to the European Court of Justice if the EU doesn't reject ACTA's provisions on disconnection for infringement and other enforcement provisions.

The ACTA treaty allows for criminal sanctions against non-commercial file-sharers, demands border-searches of laptop hard-drives and personal devices for pirated material, requires ISPs to spy on their users, and gives movie and record companies the right to take whole households off the Internet with unsubstantiated allegations of piracy.

Read EurActive.com Article:  Parliament threatens court action on anti-piracy

School Spying on Students through Laptop Webcams?

A federal class action suit claims a suburban school district in Pennsylvania has been spying on students and families through the "indiscriminant use of and ability to remotely activate the webcams incorporated into each laptop issued to students," without the knowledge or consent of students or parents.

Read full story from Courtroom News: Big Brother Is Here, Families Say

Read: Class Action Lawsuit 

No Ruling on Google Book Settlement….yet.

Media outlets went into overdrive yesterday and today as Judge Denny Chin, of the Southern District of New York, heard closing arguments in his New York courtroom. Overall the Fairness Hearing Settlement message was clear: a broad and diverse collection of stakeholders have major objections to the Google Book Settlement. Judge Chin announced early in the Google Fairness Hearing that he would not make a ruling yesterday, “There is just too much to digest. And however I come out, I want to write an opinion that explains my reasoning.”

The Associated Press summed up the day, noting that Judge Chin: “(Q)uestioned whether Google and lawyers for authors and publishers went too far when they struck a deal that would let the gigantic search engine make money presiding over the world’s largest digital library.”

Read more:

Library Journal: Objectors Outnumber Supporters in First Half of Google Settlement Fairness Hearing 

Associated Press: NYC judge expresses some doubts about Google deal

Main Justice (blog): Selected Comments from the Google Books Court Hearing

Washington Post: Judge puts off ruling on Google's proposed digital book settlement

Publishers Weekly: At Google Fairness Hearing, DoJ Justice Slams Settlement

Boston Globe: NYC judge expresses some doubts about Google deal

New York Times: Judge Hears Arguments on Google Book Settlement

Supplemental Amicus Curiae filed by Open Book Alliance on the Google Book Settlement

Today, 28 January 2010, the Open Book Alliance filed a Supplemental Amicus Curiae in opposition to the proposed settlement between the Authors Guild, Inc., Association of American Publishers, Inc. and Google, Inc. The first Amicus Curiae was filed on 4 September 2009.

The Open Book Alliance believes that the proposed settlement threatens to bottleneck the access to and distribution and pricing of the largest, private digital database of books in the world. It would do so by using the class action mechanism to not only redress past harm, but to prospectively shape the future of digital book distribution, display and search.