© cricket; academic settled copyright case

Cricket on YouTube
Cricinfo reports that YouTube is in trouble with the august institution that is the International Cricket Council. The ICC has instructed YouTube to remove clips of the cricket World Cup which it claims infringes its copyright. The ICC has said that, while it wants people to enjoy the games, it has to protect the interests of those who have taken licences to broadcast the games and provide mobile content pertaining to them.

The IPKat wonders precisely what the clips are. Are people uploading segments of content already broadcast by the licensed authorities, or are we talking about spectators who have furtively recorded parts of the games on their mobile phones? If it’s the latter, the IPKat can’t see what remedy there would be in copyright law.

Joyce copyright case settled

The Belfast Telegraph reports that American academic Carol Loeb Schloss has settled her dispute with the estate of James Joyce. Professor Schloss wrote a book about Lucia Joyce, James Joyce’s daughter in 2003, but was forced to cut out some of the footnotes. Critics claimed that the book lacked evidence, and so Schloss sued the James Joyce estate for permission to publicise the material in question. Now the parties have agreed that the material can be published – but only in America. The estate had previously withheld permission in order to "protect the privacy and memory" of Joyce’s daughter. Now however the material will be published on a password protected website and in an appendix to the US edition of her book.

The IPKat says that obviously the parties can do what they want through a settlement, but he’s never comfortable with arbitrary geographical restrictions on the flow of ideas.
© cricket; academic settled copyright case © cricket; academic settled copyright case Reviewed by Anonymous on Tuesday, March 27, 2007 Rating: 5

No comments:

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.