To Promote American Innovation, We’ve Got to Modernize This Office — Jessica Higa and Alden Abbott of the Daily Signal write, “It is surprising that the Copyright Office is part of the Library of Congress. Copyrights are handled apart from patent grants, which are housed (along with trademarks) in a separate executive agency, the Patent and Trademark Office. The Library of Congress also exists to share information, while the Copyright Office exists to protect intellectual property. The Copyright Office must keep up with digital technology, an important medium for intellectual property. In spite of this, it has been forced to share with the Library of Congress a location, personnel, and what is—for the Copyright Office’s purposes—an extremely antiquated information technology system.”
Music Remixing vs. Remastering: What was licensed in the ABS v. CBS lawsuit? — Washington School of Law Professor Sean O’Connor provides an analysis of the recent decision that found that remastering a sound recording was sufficient to create a new copyrighted work. The case presents many complex issues, including pre-1972 sound recordings. In addition, O’Connor looks at the court’s confusion between the industry practices of mixing and mastering.
Improving YouTube’s Content ID could help creators of all stripes — Ellen Seidler writes, “Clearly, Google needs to do a much better job in providing access and accountability with its Content ID and monetization programs. Expand outreach to indie artists. Include them in discussions about how to improve Content ID. Update the interface to make it more intuitive and user-friendly. Open the books so that creators can see exactly how much revenue is earned and where it goes. Be innovative and use Content ID to open new avenues to legitimate use of copyrighted content.”
FCC Set-Top Box Proposal Is About Copyright — Following a request from a number of Representatives, the US Copyright Office this week weighed in on the potential copyright implications of the FCC’s set-top box proposal, concluding that it indeed impacted copyright interests in a way that exceeds the FCC’s authority. David Newhoff breaks it down here.