Woot bites back at AP: You owe us $17.50 for copying our content

When Woot!, an internet company that sells just one item a day, found out that the Associated Press had quoted a portion of its announcement on the company's sale to Amazon.com in a news article, it sent the AP a letter, detailing how the newswire owed the company $17.50 for the use of their content.

Associated Press, which has long asked for a licencing fee when quoting portions of articles or an article in its entirety, wasn't very amused by the newly acquired e-commerce company's satirical stab at them. 

According to the letter sent to the Associated Press:

The AP, we can’t thank you enough for looking our way. You see, when we showed off our good news on Wednesday afternoon, we expected we’d get a little bit of attention. But when we found your little newsy thing you do, we couldn’t help but notice something important. And that something is this: you printed our web content in your article! The web content that came from our blog! Why, isn’t that the very thing you’ve previously told nu-media bloggers they’re not supposed to do?

So, The AP, here we are. Just to be fair about this, we’ve used your very own pricing scheme to calculate how much you owe us. By looking through the link above, and comparing your post with our original letter, we’ve figured you owe us roughly $17.50 for the content you borrowed from our blog post, which, by the way, we worked very very hard to create. But, hey. We’re all friends here. And invoicing is such a hassle in today’s paperless society, are we right? How about this: instead of cutting us a check for the web content you liberated from our site, all you’ll need to do is show us your email receipt from today’s two pack of Sennheiser MX400 In-Ear Headphones, and we’ll call it even. 

[Story via the Consumerist] 

Read More

Men in Work told to pay up for plagiarism

The composers of the Australian produced smash hit Down Under have been asked to pony up royalties for their song, which infringes on the copyright with regard to a flute riff that the composers, Men at Work, blatantly ripped off a classic Australian children's song.

However, despite the controversy within the local recording industry in Australia, it has been revealed that the amount the group will have to pay is looking to be much less than originally thought.

According to the Sydney Morning Herald:

Federal Court Justice Peter Jacobson in February ruled that the famous flute riff from Men at Work's 1980s song was the same as the children's tune, Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gum Tree.

Music publisher Larrikin Music holds the copyright for the original melody, which was penned more than 75 years ago by Toorak teacher Marion Sinclair for a Girl Guides competition.

In a judgment released in the Federal Court in Sydney today, Justice Jacobson ordered music group EMI and Down Undersongwriters Colin Hay and Ron Strykert to pay Larrikin 5 percent of royalties from the song dating back to 2002 and on royalties from future earnings.

The total amount the group must pay, however, is yet to be fully calculated.  Watch the actual music video after the jump.

Read More

In major copyright law twist, YouTube/Google tastes victory in Viacom lawsuit

In an extraordinarily well greeted triumph in terms of copyright for YouTube, Google - the website's parent company - has won over media giant Viacom in a billion-dollar lawsuit that was filed over clips containing the company's copyrighted content.

The justice system, which has effectively saved YouTube from economic and legal ruin, ruled based on summary judgement - dismissing Viacom's $1 billion lawsuit against the internet giant.

Read More

Apple, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and your jailbroken iPhone

Congress is yet to rule whether or not unlocking (or 'jailbreaking') an Apple mobile device, such as an iPhone or iPod Touch should be exempted from the Millennium Copyright Act, which is said to protect Apple from such threats to their online store and media retail business model. 

However, unlocking and hacking iPhones and other Apple devices has become increasingly popular, as the company refuses to loosen its grip on the market and devices that it produces. 

One must admit that it is in Apple's own financial interest, as is explained in the video embedded above, to keep its devices within its control, and only have software that it approves of. Not only is it financially sensible for the company, but it also keeps control on the quality of the applications and general software that runs on the device. 

Read More