In an article I found, one magician is suing another magician for copying the original magician’s trick. This brings up an interesting question, how far should copyright extend? Should actions be copyrighted as well, or just objects? The magician in question has fled the country and is doing a successful job of evading charges by simple having his whereabouts be unknown. So, how far should copyright extend? How can a law protect an action? To what extend should this be done? For example, if a coach on a sports team comes up with a particular play or technique, should it be copyrighted and not allowed to be passed on?

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130304/03161322186/magician-sued-teller-copyright-infringement-has-tried-disappearing-act-response.shtml

I did a little research and stumbled upon the book “Complex Copyright” which mentions that copyright does not just affect obvious creative works such as pieces of art and literature, but also such things as maps and software. Although I had known this in the back of my mind, I never really thought about how strange it is that even objects such as maps can be copyrighted. It made me think of other creative works that may be copyrighted that many people do not immediately associate with creative works. I know that I have never really looked at maps in a creative manner, for example. I have always seen them as being much more factual and not really having an author.

http://0-site.ebrary.com.libcat.lafayette.edu/lib/lafayettecol/docDetail.action?docID=10518240

When I was browsing the internet trying to find an article to use for our blog today, I came across this article about the rapper RZA, who is suing Meiko Kaji for demanding compensation for using a part of his song. The one part of this article that popped out to me was towards the end when one of RZA’s lawyers points out that the part Meiko Kaji wants compensation for is “so simple that the least talented person in the studio could have replayed it had anyone wished to do so”. I found this interesting because it ask the question what makes something worthy of protecting? Just because this was a simple piece of work does that necessarily mean it should not be able to have the same protection?

Article

I decided to go into Arabian Nights with a copyright mind frame, but honestly found myself not thinking about any of that while I was actually watching the show. I found myself absorbed in the stories not even fully understanding how these were all stories within stories. I loved the design of the stage and I thought all of the costumes were well done. Overall, I enjoyed the play. However, I found the first act way more entertaining then the second act which focused on a more serious side of the play.

I recently just read an article that discusses the performing rights of artist. The article describes how Taylor Swifts’ performing rights organization BMI was suing a North Dakota bar for playing her music without paying a licensing fee. I thought this was extremely interesting because for the first time the singer was actually in the middle of the lawsuit. The lawsuit involves performance rights and venues. A venue must pay royalties in order to play certain musicians songs. This particular case is interesting because it really shows both the strength of the law and the complication of the law.

When I think about the complication of the law, my mind immediately goes to Paul Goldstein and his opinions on copyright. Although Goldstein believes in having a strong set of copyright laws, he, also, discusses how complicated copyright has gotten with new technology and with the many different parties now involved in copyright issues.

Article

I found this site discussing the difference between copyright, trademarks, and patents. I found it interesting because each of these things are much different that I had originally thought them to be. I  also found it funny that patents do not last as long as do copyrights. If you ask me, I think that patents should last longer because I feel that inventing something is the most solid, original idea that can be produced.

I went into the play with a copyright mindset, due to it being a requirement for class. Now, due to it’s age, copyright law does not apply to the original. Due to that, I have seen many variations on the several stories, as well as the play on a whole. The ad lib section was especially interesting, as within the play itself, there could be multiple incarnations. As brought up in class, the “copyright” regarding ad lib was a bit confusing. While the play itself has no copyright, the variations and ideas in others can be copyrighted. On a deeper level, while the concept of ad lib can be a copyrighted concept, the actual ad lib used can be considered the property of the actor. In the end, I find it interesting that a work that does not have copyright can still be surrounded and pressured by it.

Library Link

The article above got me thinking about how to enforce copyright laws.  It seems to be that it is exceedingly difficult to catch people pirating media including music, movies and tv shows on the internet.  This is probably why it has increased, because citizens are becoming more proficient with technology. I can;t think of a way to actually monitor people pirating technology but i do think increasing the penalty if they are caught could help.  This is yet another aspect to copyright that needs to be discussed.

I recently stumbled across an article discussing an artist who sued twitter over copyright issues. The artist, Christopher Boffoli, sued twitter because the “company refused to take down copies of his artwork uploaded to Twitter by its users”. Buffoli had contacted twitter regarding the issue, and they simply ignored his requests and did not do anything about it. I think that this shows how many large companies abuse the rights of authors for their own personal gain. Twitter obviously did not care about the author’s request, and simply ignored it thinking that it would not escalate any further and that they could get away with not doing the extra work of taking it down. However, Buffoli did end up winning the case. I think based on our readings that Goldstein would applaud Boffoli for not allowing twitter to do what they wish with his work.

Clip

The news clip above that talks about eBooks in libraries hadn’t struck me yet and brings up a whole set of copyright questions.  Before this video I hadn’t though of the impact that eBooks could have on a mass scale such as libraries.  The video describes the many benefits of this but didn’t mention a few that I was thinking of.  This way members of the library wouldn’t have to physically go to the library to check out and return books they could simply get them online.  Also books would never be late because they are deleted from the device automatically.  There are many benefits to this and the statistic that says 75 percent of libraries now do this means it’s catching on.  I personally didn’t know that libraries did this and will now look for it at my own public library.

This also creates copyright problems though.  As the video mentioned certain publishers don’t allow for their works to be used in library eBooks.  I am not sure if they don’t allow their works to be published on eBooks at all or just for libraries but i can see why.  Maybe it’s because I don’t have enough knowledge of it but I don’t see why on an iPad while borrowing a book from a library the person borrowing could simply take pictures of all the pages and keep them from good. Another copyright problem is there are no laws for this type of thing yet.  It is unexplored legal territory and I am curious to see what happens.