BookLiberator Lets You Make E-Books Cheaply (And Is Definitely Not Intended For Copyright Violation!) – The Firewall – the world of security – Forbes

02-Jan-11

via blogs.forbes.com

“Remember the sense of liberation that came from digitizing your CDs and then chucking a decade or two’s accumulation of archaic plastic? James Vasile and Ian Sullivan want to give you that gratification again–this time from rendering into bits your hundreds of pounds of dead trees.

Their invention, on display over the weekend at the HOPE hackers conference in New York: the BookLiberator, a simple contraption of poplar wood, screws, plexiglass, and two mounted digital cameras. Rest a book or magazine on the device’s adjustable base, and set its boxy frame so that the plexiglass spreads the pages flat. Take a picture with each camera, turn the page, and repeat. Before long you’ve created new fodder for your Kindle, iPad, or Sony Reader.”

Filed in books, copyright, tools | Permalink | Comments (0) »

Happy [belated] public domain day!

02-Jan-11

January 1 is public domain day, where in many parts of the world, some old works become free of copyright restrictions. In the U.S. no works will become so free due to the passing of time until 2019 — assuming the duration of copyright restriction is not again retroactively extended before then.

via gondwanaland.com

Filed in copyright | Permalink | Comments (0) »

The RIAA? Amateurs. Here’s how you sue 14,000+ P2P users

02-Jun-10

The sheer volume suggests that these cases aren’t designed for prosecution—and they don’t need to be. As the RIAA lawsuits showed us, most people will settle. Data from the recording industry lawsuits, revealed in a court case, showed that 11,000 of the 18,000 Does settled immediately or had their cases dropped by the labels. Seven thousand either refused to settle or never responded to the settlement letter, but after the RIAA subpoenaed their identities and filed “named” lawsuits against them, nearly every one settled.

After years of litigation, the number of people who have pursued a trial all the way to a verdict can be counted on one hand.

The legal campaign has the potential to earn real money. Copies of the settlement letters and settlement contracts seen by Ars Technica show that Dunlap, Grubb, & Weaver generally asks for $1,500 to $2,500, threatening to sue for $150,000 if no settlement payment is forthcoming. Assuming that 90 percent of the current targets settle for $1,500, this means that the lawyers, studios, and P2P detection company would split $19.7 million.

Once the infrastructure has been set up, this sort of system is simple to replicate, since it’s built largely on sending out letters and collecting cash. If the lawyers can continue signing up indie film clients at the current rate, they could be on their way to filing nearly 30,000 lawsuits by year’s end, which would double the potential cash on the table.

via arstechnica.com

Time to repeal copyright law.

Posted via web from crasch’s posterous

Filed in copyright, ip | Permalink | Comments (0) »

Who will watch Watchmen? Nobody, if 20th Century Fox gets its way.

12-Sep-08

http://news.yahoo.com/s/eonline/20080819/en_movies_eo/24472

Who will watch Watchmen? Nobody, if 20th Century Fox gets its way.

After a major court victory, the studio has announced a bid to block the release of Warner Bros.’ anticipated adaptation of the seminal graphic novel by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons.

Fox originally tried to develop the project more than a decade ago, but didn’t manage to get the film off the drawing board. The studio claims Warners never properly acquired the rights to Watchmen, and, in a major twist, instead of seeking a share of the would-be blockbuster’s box-office gross, Fox is seeking to kill the flick entirely before it unspools in theaters March 6.

Filed in copyright, ip | Permalink | Comments (0) »

Betcha didn’t know a building could be copyrighted…

10-Jun-08

Good thing we have copyright to encourage encourage artists:

Making Your Case for a Permit
If you do decide that a permit is the way to go (in other words, you’re going to use a tripod), one thing they will want to know is, “What will the photos be used for?” They may ask if they’re going to be used for commercial purposes, educational purposes, to be sold as postcards, etc.

For example, on my recent trip to New York, we contacted the observatory at the top of 30 Rockefeller Center to request a permit to shoot the New York Skyline at dusk from their observatory (which would require me setting up a tripod). They had a page on their site for photo permits, and who to contact, etc. and so we followed their instructions. Unfortunately, we were turned down because we were going to use the photos in one of my books, which they felt was a “Commercial Purpose” so our request was denied.

We also contacted the Guggenheim Museum in New York, and they had a request for photography permit section as well, and they were pretty clear and adamant about the fact that both the exterior and interior of the Guggenheim were copyrighted, and tightly controlled. Despite several calls to the department that handles photo requests, we were never able to reach anyone, and they never called us back, so we were out of luck.

Filed in copyright, ip, rampant, stupidity | Permalink | Comments (0) »

The Hidden Costs of Documentaries

20-May-08

Good thing we have copyright, to encourage artists to create new works.

The Hidden Cost of Documentaries

Clearance costs – licensing fees paid to copyright holders for permission to use material like music, archival photographs and film and news clips – can send expenses for filmmakers soaring into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Jonathan Caouette’s “Tarnation,” for instance – a portrait of a young man’s relationship with his mentally ill mother that Mr. Caouette edited at home, on a laptop computer – was widely reported to have cost $218. In fact, after a distributor picked up “Tarnation,” improved the quality with post-production editing and cleared music rights, the real cost came to more than $460,000. Clearance expenses were about half the total.

Filed in copyright, sucks | Permalink | Comments (0) »

Home