Your Name Is My Business

From BBC News, Blizzard, makers of the popular MMORPG, World of Warcraft, have sued software developer, Michael Donnelly, for copyright infringement and breach of contract (i.e., EULA) for creating a bot that automates game tasks in the online world.

My guess is that, for the copyright infringement, Blizzard is relying on MAI v. Peak which holds that a copy created in the RAM can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated and is thus subject of the Copyright Act. Of course, that is old (1993) case law when it comes to computers and copyright. Doesn’t Blizzard implicitly permit (i.e., license) a user to place a copy of the program into RAM while they play?

The EULA is a different story. I bet somewhere in there is a prohibition against automating game tasks outside what is permitted by Blizzard.

Tags: Copyright Law // Add Comment »

From Rolling Stone, Wal-Mart apparently uses the same tactics when negotiating CD prices as Apple does to hold songs from the iTunes Music Store at the 99 cent price-point. Wal-Mart wants new release and popular CDs to be at the price point of $9.72, and (gasp!), they want to make a profit off the actual CD sale. Currently, the chain takes a hit on the CD sale hoping the consumer buys a boom box or iPod with it. That means the record companies may have to lower their prices in order to keep CDs in the mega-retailer’s stores.

Since the record companies have, for years, been raking in big profits from inflated CD prices of $15, $16, $17, even $18, I am not sorry to see this kind of leverage exerted against them (by Wal-Mart, Apple, Amazon… whomever).

Now, who wants to take on the oil companies over gas prices!?!

Tags: Copyright Law // Add Comment »

ArsTechnica blurb on innocent defendant’s attempt to collect attorney’s fees from the RIAA. It seems the courts make this quite difficult, and he has asked SCOTUS to weigh in. With rationale like that cited by several of the federal courts, it is no wonder the RIAA uses the subpoena tactics they do to get the names of possible defendants. Without the the real threat of having to dish out defendants’ attorneys fees for (mis-)use of litigation, what’s the incentive to play fair?

Tags: Copyright Law // Add Comment »

Mark Cuban, dot-com business whiz and Dallas Maverick’s owner, has a C-Net write up claiming the album is dead. He argues that record companies need to convince musicians to release songs (for the going-rate of 99 cents, of course) in a serialized fashion (i.e., like weekly TV episodes). (Counter-point by Steve (Not of Police Academy fame) Guttenberg here)

My feeling on music over the past (at least) 10 years or so is that the “value” is not driven by the quality of music, but by the popularity of the artist. No doubt, this was true to a certain extent back in the days of Led Zeppelin, the Beatles and the like. However, there is an underlying quality to that music - perhaps it is that everybody in the band actually played instruments together - which is lacking today.  Honestly, that started to disappear during my generation’s musical hey-day (the ’80s) as much as I’ll admit that I like a lot of it.  In 2040, when I am an old geezer, nobody is going to look back on the Late ’90s/Early ’00s music and call it “Classic Pop”.

I am all for artists making a buck on their music (and all of the associated licensing, marketing and other endorsements that goes with it). BUT, it is clear that the digital age has cheapened (in multiple ways) the music product while the recording industry uses the Copyright Act to reap unjustified benefits from the “image” side of the music. That is not what the Copyright Act is supposed to protect.

So, perhaps instead of “The Album is Dead,” the reality is that “Music is Dead.”

Tags: Copyright Law // Add Comment »

Ron Coleman has a super fun trademark project for anyone interested in That Nationally Televised Sporting Event With Lots Of Expensive And Funny Commercials That Takes Place Generally At The End Of January.

Tags: Trademark Law // Add Comment »