BAD BIRTHDAYS AND DASTARDLY DOWNLOADS


The IPKat brings news of a trio of incredulity-causing copyright stories:

* Information Week reports that Google took down a stylised logo which it posted to celebrate the birthday of artist Joan Miro after the Miro family objected. They claimed that the logo, which was styled after Miro, but did not directly take any of his work, infringed their copyright and moral rights. Google expressed disappointment, but took the logo down.

The IPKat says that this event touches on the tricky subject of where style and ideas stop and expression begins. He can understand why the Miro family might want to retain control, but he notes that one moral right protects the artist’s reputation. The family’s reaction doesn’t seem to have done their reputation much good.


* P2P asks whether the ‘the Royal Household, the British government, it's territories, or whoever arranged the celebrations’ of the Queen’s 80th birthday sought permission from AOL/TimeWarner for ‘Happy Birthday to You’ to be played, and if so, whether royalities were played.

The IPKat suspects that the piece is somewhat tongue in cheek, but it puts the IPKat in mind of Flanders and Swann’s account of the history of Greensleeves, where ‘the royalties go to royalty’.


* The Inquirer reports that RIAA have sued a family without a computer for filesharing. If this is correct, the IPKat is speechless.
BAD BIRTHDAYS AND DASTARDLY DOWNLOADS BAD BIRTHDAYS AND DASTARDLY DOWNLOADS Reviewed by Anonymous on Sunday, April 23, 2006 Rating: 5

2 comments:

  1. Don't forget to keep us informed on any letters you might get from the Miro family for posting that picture ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  2. We'll keep you informed! The IPKat has an instant-take-down policy in respect of any artwork that a copyright owner asks us not to hotlink to.

    ReplyDelete

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.