This week’s edition of Clippings features extended commentary on our three Articles of the Week; an update on Radiohead’s online distribution play; Tim O’Reilly analyzing e-book possibilities in the face of the Kindle’s introduction; and two thumbs down for the Copyright Office’s online registration system.

This is Copycense.

Articles of the Week

The Iconoclast (News.com). Major Copyright Bill Boosts Penalties, Creates New Agency. Dec. 5, 2007. Intrepid News.com tech reporter Declan McCullagh summarizes the entertainment industry’s latest legislative gambit, called the “PRO IP” bill. All the usual monopoly enforcement and extension concessions are present in “PRO IP,” but the kicker is the creation of a Cabinet-level post that would serve as the president’s principal advisor and spokesman for intellectual property matters, as well as identifying countries that don’t adequately protect IP rights. This is particularly important, since American intellectual property law now is one of America’s chief exports, courtesy of the Trade Representative’s Special 301 process. Arguably, this new post — which McCullagh says would have an initial budget totaling $25 million — would supplement the Trade Representative’s efforts to make U.S. intellectual property law the global standard.

It does not concern us that the entertainment industry is trying once again to make copyright law even more restrictive than it is; to echo a Chris Rock skit, this is what the entertainment industry is supposed to do. Instead, what concerns us is the ventriloquist-like effect the lobby has on members of Congress, who seem to mindlessly parrot the industry’s propaganda about things like “global competitiveness,” “piracy,” and “economic losses.” The industry’s “evidence,” so much of it without a shred of empirical or objective validity, should not be the basis for public policy. Categories: Bundle of Rights; Legislation & Regulation; Politics & Government.

Eric Bangeman. Colleges Serious About Dealing With Copyright, P2P Issues. Ars Technica. Dec. 5, 2007. Now that we’ve ranted about the entertainment industry’s use of meaningless statistical data, we voice similar concerns about the Brandeis University DMCA survey. Survey studies are like teaching: easy to do, difficult to do well. This study has some holes in it. The first thing that concerns us is the low number of respondents (79); that is too few from which to make reasonable popular generalizations. The second issue that concerns us is the nature of the questions themselves. For example, Question 2 asks “What non-punitive measures have you taken to reduce DMCA complaints?” Two of the possible responses mention “education.” What is copyright “education”? How is it done? How often? Who does it? Are rights and exceptions reviewed in the educational initiative? There are too many questions to answer.

Third, the researcher does not make clear what he intended to measure with the questionnaire. Finally, it alarms us that Question 6 begins with the phrase “If you have a DMCA agent …” If you run a network and do not have a DMCA agent, that is a problem: you’ve lost “safe harbor” protection under Section 512(c). We applaud Brandeis for having the idea and taking the initiative. This is the sort of data educational institutions should be gathering on their own initiative. Unfortunately, the strength of the idea is diminished by weak execution, leading to meaningless data. Ultimately, this survey cannot say conclusively whether or not colleges are serious about dealing with copyright issues. Categories: Computers; DMCA; Education; Networks; Research.

TorrentFreak. Charity Forced to Pay Copyright Fee So Kids Can Sing Carols. Dec. 9, 2007. “Happy Birthday,” the sequel. We can’t imagine this stuff. Categories: International; Music; Licensing & Permissions.

Technorati Tags: Copycense, Copycense Clippings, K. Matthew Dames

(more…)