Starting this August, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has decided to expand their Anti-Piracy Warning (APW) Seal for use with any work protected by criminal penalties under federal copyright law. Previously, the use of the FBI seal was only available to five entertainment associations: the Motion Picture Association of America, the Recording Industry Association of America, the Software & Information Industry Association, the Business Software Alliance, and the Entertainment Software Association. The seal is used to remind consumers of the criminal penalties for copyright infringement and the FBI’s role in investigating infringement. Formerly, the seal’s use was governed by a variety of financial and administrative restrictions including a written agreement. The FBI’s update now allows the seal to be downloaded for free from their website. Under the new regulation, the Anti-Piracy Warning Seal is available for use by all copyright holders who meet specific conditions. Unlike the original APW Seal program, which restricted the Seal’s use to five associations, the new regulation will enhance the Seal’s availability. The new regulation includes the following conditions: The APW seal is authorized for use on copyrighted works including films, audio recordings, electronic media, software, books, photographs, etc. The APW Seal shall only be used on copyrighted works subject to U.S. Criminal Code...
Learn MoreOn July 3, the Library Copyright Alliance filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court as a result of their decision to review the Second Circuit’s decision in John Wiley & Sons v. Kirtsaeng. The decision interpreted the first-sale doctrine, which allows legal owners to resell, lend, or dispose of copyrighted works after purchase, to apply only to works manufactured in the United States. As a result, foreign manufacturers have greater control over their products under U.S. law. Many organizations like libraries and museums have submitted amicus briefs urging the Supreme Court to reject this interpretation since they depend on the first-sale doctrine to operate. In December 2010, the Supreme Court faced a similar issue in Costco Wholesale Corp. v. Omega. In that case, the Supreme Court held that the first-sale doctrine only applied to U.S. manufactured works. The unwritten ruling was based on a 4-4 split by the court. Justice Elena Kagan did not take part, since she was involved in the issue as the Solicitor General. When Kirtsaeng reaches the Supreme Court next year, however, she could be the deciding vote that finally determines the issue. In the Kirtsaeng case, the Second Circuit upheld a jury award of statutory damages to John Wiley & Sons, after Supap...
Learn MoreThe answer to the questions “Who owns my copyright?” and “Who holds the copyright to a work I created?” are far more complex than you might think. Copyrights are created when an original work becomes fixed in a tangible form, but sometimes it can be unclear who holds a given copyright. Usually, the person who generates the work is the copyright holder, but one exception to this rule is works made for hire or under a commission. If a work is created for hire, then it is the employer, be it a corporation or an individual, who holds the copyright rather than the employed creator. Under copyright law, work for hire generally includes: Work created within the scope of employment OR Work created under order or commission, including a variety of collaborative or collective works, if there is an express, written agreement between the parties. Copyright law also includes a variety of case law beyond merely the statutory language, and Stone Law can help you determine whether your work falls under the “for hire” exception. The statutory definition is not suitable to all situations, and yours may be unique. Whether you are an employee or an employer, Stone Law can help you gain control of your work or draft...
Learn MoreIn 1998, Congress passed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which includes a variety of provisions to address intellectual property concerns including things like digital material and the Internet. In addition, the DMCA updated U.S. law to implement two World Intellectual Property Organization treaties from 1996. The DMCA strengthens penalties for digital piracy, including criminal penalties for tampering with anti-piracy measures in software. The manufacture of software or devices to circumvent copyright protection measures is also prohibited. There are several exceptions to these penalties, including law enforcement, libraries, and educational institutions, as well as a temporary exception for copying data while repairing your computer. Although it includes these new penalties, Title 1 of the DMCA specifies that there are no changes to the existing copyright infringement rights, remedies, or defenses. The DMCA also exempts foreign copyright holders from the U.S. law that requires copyrights to be registered with the U.S. Copyright Office before an infringement lawsuit can be filed. Stone Law can help you navigate the DMCA’s technological provisions and penalties and protect your rights. The DMCA makes a special provision for internet service providers that absolves them of copyright infringement liability provided they follow specified guidelines. ISPs can avoid liability if they follow the Act’s guidelines. One requirement is...
Learn More
Follow Us!