TITLE XVII : The Founding Fathers Promise Of Property Rights

Distinguished Toastmaster
BUSINESS & BRANDING COACH . LIFE & LEADERSHIP STRATEGIST MOTIVATIONAL SPEAKER SERVING ENTREPRENEURS &
MAIN STREET

TITLE XVII : The Founding Fathers Promise Of Property Rights [ You Are On This CLICK Page ]

_
TITLE XVII the COPYRIGHT CODE OF THE ARTS (c) Carrie Devorah :
_

_________________________________________________________

HOUSE Judiciary's Majority GC's email to me May 1 stands as a favored email for me. GC stands for General Counsel. GC for the Majority Committee, Joe Keeley, laid out for our half hour meeting criteria, "I need a little more sense of what changes you want in Title 17 to make this a more productive meeting before you come in however. Very busy these days with lots of meetings." In a prior email, Joe said he didnt have time to do homework on me....

Rule of Thumb is always do your homework. My circulated recommendations are below.....

One of the Original Members of LIMA
An Advocate for Copyright Integrity
"Teaching Legislators One Hearing At A Time the Value of 2D IP to the Arts"
___________________________________________

Title 17 United States Code XVII

NOTEWORTHY
(1) Capitalize the ‘b’ in Bill (2) Typo in subparagraphs (d)(4)(A) and (C) by correcting TYPO     “substituting” “Copyright Royalty and Distribution Reform Act of 2004
<>
LEGEND
Title 17 Text: Red : [ TITLE 17 ]         .
Carrie Devorah Notes/ Comments: [ CD ]
<>

§ 101—Definitions

1- [ CD ] Orphan Works is an area the Copyright Office appears to be seeking to monetize. ORPHAN WORKS can be created by programs that remove the metadata and signature of the IP Creator rendering the IP an “Orphan” whose ‘parent/creator’ needs to be searched for to be found. Removing Metadata from a Copyright Owner’s IP could be adressed as “Tampering”, entering a Copyright Owner’s site to remove IP could be “Tresspassing” or “Entering property of another for the purpose of damaging it” 18.2-121 under Virginia law, if Legistlaors followed the lead of India, a signatory on the Berne Convention.

[ TITLE 17 ] ORPHAN WORKS appear to be ‘‘anonymous work’’, a work on the copies or phonorecords of which no natural person is identified as author ANONYMOUS WORKS APPEAR TO BE REDESIGNATED

<>

2- [ CD ] The term ‘Devices’ should be explanded to include PCs, iPHONES, mobile, GOOGLE GLASS and other new technologies that fall under audiovisual works as platforms/machines/devices through which images are shown.

[ TITLE 17 ] ‘‘Audiovisual works’’ are works that consist of a series of related images which are intrinsically intended to be shown by the use of machines or devices such as projectors, viewers, or electronic equipment,

<>

3- [ CD ] ‘‘Copies’’ should be expanded to include Hand Copied in that books are made by hand, machine and device

[ TITLE 17 ] “Copies” are material objects, other than phonorecords, in which a work is fixed by any method now known or later developed, and from which the work can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device

<>

4- [ CD ] A ‘‘Copyright Royalty Judge’’ is a misnomer in that the scope of the Title 17 definition of the boundaries of the “Copyright Royalty Judge” oversight is limited. The “Copyright Royalty Judge” does not oversee art or photography or writing Royalties. The “Copyright Royalty Judge’’ oversight is limited to MUSICAL WORK, SOUND RECORDING & CABLE SYSTEMS hence, to avoid confusion, the “Copyright Royalty Judges” oversight should be clarified by calling them “MUSICAL WORK, SOUND RECORDING & CABLE SYSTEMS COPYRIGHT ROYALTY JUDGES.”

<>

5- [ CD ] The term “Motion pictures” might be updated to include the terminology “video” and “streaming.” The definition of “Motion pictures” aught to adress “rotoscoping,” bringing dead back hence generating new streams of commerce through using computerized graphic holograms so Tupac could perform at Coachella with Snoop Dogg at Coachella or Natalie Cole could perform with her dad Nat or that American Idol’s Dion could duet with Elvis, similar to Forrest Gump talking on screen with President Nixon. Rotoscoping takes images from pre-existing piece of video and puts the celeb in a whole new environment by creating a completely new use of the same piece of video. http://animatedtv.about.com/od/showsaz/ss/animation101_3.htm Is Rotoscoping a derivative work is will Rotoscoping potentially might be challenged as ID theft along with IP theft along with commerce theft if permission is not sought to use the celeb’s visage. Celeb images are used without authorization as Avatars, as discussed, as well as images in some vindictive and nasty in tone photographic montages of celebrities, politicians and people in embarrassing depictions, with or without scrawls using the Internet as a bully pulpit. These altered images are expanded from existing photos, IP, intellectual property. Most often these photoshopped images are used without Authorization of the Copyright Owner      [ Attachment 1 ]

https://www.google.com/search?q=photoshopped+politicians&client=firefox-a&hs=2Yo&rls=org.mozilla:enUS:official&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=1MOiUebOAe3E4APMk4GoDQ&ved=0CDQQsAQ&biw=1242&bih=565 Some persons enjoy the depiction. http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/fans-amanda-bynes-photoshopping-image-twitter-frenzy-article-1.1330400 There have been increasing instances of photographers being outed for having digitally enhanced images through photoshopping. http://www.mediabistro.com/10000words/10-news-photos-that-took-photoshop-too_b328 Most recently, a WHNPA awardee’s award was removed for having altered his photo. Tracy Woodward was stripped of his award for digitally manipulating a photograph https://nppa.org/node/38306 The WHNPA contest rules state, “"The rules state: The content of a photograph must not be altered in Photoshop or by any other means. No element should be digitally added to or subtracted from any photograph and the image must be a truthful representation of whatever happened in front of the camera during exposure. Retouching to eliminate dust and scratches is acceptable. Reasonable adjustments in Photoshop are acceptable. These include cropping, dodging and burning, conversion into grayscale, and normal toning and color adjustments that restore the authentic nature of the photograph.”

"Excessive changes in density, contrast, color and saturation levels that alter the original scene are not acceptable. Backgrounds should not be digitally blurred or eliminated by burning down or by aggressive toning. Frames or borders outside the image area are not allowed nor is text—digital or otherwise—allowed on the image.” The issue of post-processing of news images is under discussion with the NPPA, the WNPA and other news reporting entities, too.

[ TITLE 17 ] ‘‘Motion pictures’’, audiovisual works consisting of a series of related images which, when shown in succession, impart an impression of motion, together with accompanying sounds

<>

6- [ CD ] The interpretation of ‘‘pseudonymous work’’ is being challenged in the online world of Social Networking. “Friends” are Avatars with no real way of knowing who the author or person is or is not. Accounts are hacked by Anonymous and possibly assigned Fictitious Names or having Anonymous person assume Management of a real persons account that is commandeered, ISPs are diverted elsewhere- possibly in America or, as is increasing in the world of Hacking, to other countries in Asia, Russia, etc. A ‘‘pseudonymous work’’ is a work on the copies or phonorecords of which the author is identified under a fictitious name.

<>

7- [ CD ] Publication should include “or under license or contractual agreement” in that license agreements spell out the terms of use delineating time, territory and terms along with performance requirements and terminations.

[ TITLE 17 ] ‘‘Publication’’ is the distribution of copies or phonorecords of a work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending

<>

8- [ CD ] To perform or display a work ‘‘publicly’’ has a new meaning in these days of youtube and the Internet, Google Hangout, Skype, Gotomeeting.com and other online venues that gather people, virtually, at the same time although not from the same place but for the same purpose- watching, talking, socializing. “Social Acquaintance” has changed to include Online Friends and avatars for persons one will most likely never meet in person

[ TITLE 17 ] To perform or display – “(1) to perform or display it at a place open to the public or at any place where a substantial number of persons outside of a normal circle of a family and its social acquaintances is gathered”

<>

9- [ CD ] Defining “limited editions” to run for less than 200 is incorrect. Editions are defined individidually on a case-by-case situation, by agreement, in a contract. Edition limitations are discussed between involved parties then defined, such as, medium (ie wood, 3D process, metal) or process (ie hand stitched or screen printed, hand press, no quilting or hand painted/ quilted) or territory (ie local or east coast v west coast or US & its territories or North America) or manufacturer (ie Mom and pop v mass market v upstairs) or time (ie January through January). Editions, and ‘limited edition collectibles’ and ‘memorabilia’ can run as an edition of one or an edition of 50,000 plus or an edition of however many get printed during a time defined time period.

[ TITLE 17 ] A ‘‘work of visual art’’ is - (1) a painting, drawing, print or sculpture, existing in a single copy, in “a limited edition of 200 copies or fewer that are signed and consecutively numbered by the author” is wrong to have set as the benchmark of a “Limited Edition.”

10- [ CD ] Title 17 will benefit by being pre-emptive of abuses currently being adressed in the Courts but not currently adressed or proposed in the CPP, Copyright Principles Project and other proposals. The recent Terms of Settlement of “Twitter v TweetAdder” are noteworthy to include in Title 17. Unauthorized Use of an IP Owner’s Property, theft, is so much more than piracy. Judge Hogans Decision includes words Title 17 will benefit by adding in "creating, developing, manufacturing, adapting, modifying, making available, trafficking in, using, disclosing, selling, licensing, distributing (with or without monetary charge), updating, providing costumer support for, or offering for use, sale, license, or distribution (with or without monetary charge), any software or technology designed for…” substituting “Unauthorized Use” for “use in connection with” substituting “an Intellectual Property Owners Rights” for the words “Twitter's service.”

[ TITLE 17 ] “….shall apply to the rental, lease, or lending…”

<>

(2) [ CD ] (Refer above)

[ TITLE 17 ] a still photographic image produced for exhibition purposes only, existing in a single copy that is signed by the author, or in a limited edition of 200 copies or fewer that are signed and consecutively numbered by the author

<>

[ CD ] WORK FOR HIRE: An IP creator working for hire is still an IP creator creating Intellectual Property. The ownership of the Intellectual Property differs per each arrangement. Some IP Creators retain ownership of their IP. Some IP Creators don’t. The IP Creators who work for hire ie. photographing a wedding or creating a wedding contract are entitled to the benefits of commerce from owning their IP. Innovators working for companies can and do contract to innovate and own their innovation or partner and share with their employer in the profit from their innovation. The technology sector inspires innovation through Hackathons. Old school word for Hackathons is “brainstorming.” “Work-For-Hire is often abused. Work-For-Hire refers to the situations in which a creator of a work does not retain the rights to that work. By default, and artist or designer owns the copyright to his or her work. Work-for-hire includes two exceptions to that rule: 1. The creator of the work is an employee of a company, and the work falls within the scope of his or her employment. In this case, the employer owns the copyright. 2. A specially commissioned work is created for an independent contractor, and falls under one of the nine categories of work specified by law:

Sources: “The Graphic Artists Guild Handbook: Pricing and Ethical Guidelines.” Eleventh Edition. Graphic Artists Guild, Inc. 2003.

VISUAL ARTS: An artist creates art that can be seen visually. Art that can be seen can be copied. To state that “visual art” is not subject to protection under this Title, flies in the face of logic and means that NONE of the following art forms defined, hereto, can be protected, conflicting with Title 17 that goes at length to protection art forms such as video, filmaking, architecture, etc. The Property Rights established by the Founding Fathers does protect Visual Arts.               “The visual arts are art forms that create works that are primarily visual in nature, such as ceramics, drawing, painting, sculpture, printmaking, design, crafts, photography, video, filmmaking and architecture. These definitions should not be taken too strictly as many artistic disciplines (performing arts, conceptual art, textile arts) involve aspects of the visual arts as well as arts of other types. Also included within the visual arts are the applied arts such as industrial design, graphic design, fashion design, interior design and decorative art. The current usage of the term "visual arts" includes fine art as well as the applied, decorative arts and crafts, but this was not always the case. (Wikipedia)

[ TITLE 17 ] A work of visual art does not include--

(B) any work made for hire;

(C) any work not subject to copyright protection under this title

<>

[ CD ] The US Government employed Work-For-Hire during the New Deal. “The Works Progress Administration (WPA) was instituted by presidential executive order under the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act of April 1935, to generate public jobs for the unemployed. The WPA was restructured in 1939 when it was reassigned to the Federal Works Agency. By 1936 over 3.4 million people were employed on various WPA programs. Administered by Harry Hopkins and furnished with an original congressional allocation of $4.8 billion, the WPA made work accessible to the unemployed on an unparalleled scale by disbursing funds for an extensive array of programs. Hopkins argued that although the work relief program was more costly than direct relief payments, it was worth it. He averred, "Give a man a dole, and you save his body and destroy his spirit. Give him a job and you save both body and spirit… With wartime prosperity rising in the 1940s, the WPA became more difficult to justify, and on June 30, 1943 the agency was terminated by presidential proclamation. All told, the WPA had employed more than 8,500,000 individuals on 1,410,000 projects with an average salary of $41.57 a month, and had spent about $11 billion. " http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1599.html A WPA contractor stated their claim to their WPA work ownership by signing a Copyright Notice alongside their signature on their art. The copyright notice is on display to the public to this day. One would have to look a the WPA contract to see if the US Government contracted to allow the WPA artist to own their artwork.

To be discussed is if a US Government employee is allowed to profit from work they did while having an unfair advantage over industry peer to access and moments industry peer were shut out from, this would be images not released to the public via Flickr or other Social Networking sites, asking if Presidential photographers or Administration photographers are allowed to release books containing those inside access moments. IF a deal was cut to allow the US government employee to take on the job with the intent to write/release a book prior ie. to the President or other, papers being released to the public, then, what happens, in that this clause implies a violation or breach of official duty, possibly, or public trust on a work-for-hire job. It seems.

[ TITLE 17 ] A ‘‘work of the United States Government’’ is a work prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person's official duties.

<>

[ CD ] The correct terminology is Work-For-Hire. Work cannot be ‘made for hire’. A creative work can be made for ‘hire’ although the more correct terminology would be for lease/license/rent.

[ TITLE 17 ] A ‘‘work made for hire’’ is….

§ 102—Subject matter of copyright: In general

§103--Subject matter of copyright: Compilations and derivative works

Original Works of Authorship
[ CD ] Merriam Webster defines Originality as “1: the quality or state of being original

2: freshness of aspect, design, or style

3: the power of independent thought or constructive imagination

That Courts established a “standard of originality”, the Copyright Law standard used to assess if a work can or cannot be copyrighted. The Copyright Act of 1976 requires "copyright protection subsists ... in original works of authorship ...."       § 102(a). The United States Supreme Court recognizes the “sine qua non” of the Copyright Act is originality, the element that distinguishes if an originator’s or authors works are sufficiently original from works that are not. Copyrightable works, the US Copyright Office’s says, " must be the product of human authorship” in order to be entitled to copyright registration. Works produced by mechanical processes or random selection without any contribution by a human author are not registerable.” Of concern is music is being enhanced digitally making, for example, recording stars of persons on the Real Housewives ‘franchise.’

Technology continues to test the Copyright Offices definitions and the Founding Fathers Principle of Property Rights. David Cope, a retired professor of music at the University of California Santa Cruz, is an evangelist for synthetically composed music. Cope worked decades to develop Emily Howell. Emily Howell is a self-aware computer who analyzes her own work, an artificial intelligence ingredient key to creating a musical learning machine. Cope hopes Emily Howell, whose CD dropped from Centaur Records, will prove great musical composition isn’t just a domain limited to mankind.
http://singularityhub.com/2009/10/09/music-created-by-learning-computer-getting-better/    The Congressional Office of Technology Assessment has already determined that computers are possible of being co-creators, raising the question, yet another challenge to ‘the standard of originality’ is imminent or looming, further diminishing the American people’s right to ownership of Intellectual Property, determined by the Founding Fathers. The words say, simply, Authorship. Challenges happen. As AI increases so does the inevitably that “authorship” as a definition will be challenge for change, too.

[ TITLE 17 ] …The phrase "original works of authorship," which is purposely left undefined, is intended to incorporate without change the standard of originality established by the courts under the present copyright statute. This standard does not include requirements of novelty, ingenuity, or esthetic merit, and there is no intention to enlarge the standard of copyright protection to require them.

<>

[ CD ] The new technologies are threatening existing IP in that legislators are stepping away from the Founding Fathers’ principle of Property Rights instead it appears Congress is working to accommodate emerging technologies increasing unauthorized use of Intellectual Property damaging the IP owner’s ability to be in commerce and provide their living.

[ TITLE 17 ] Authors … Section 102 implies neither that that subject matter is unlimited nor that new forms of expression within that general area of subject matter would necessarily be unprotected….

<>

Fixation in Tangible Form

[ CD ] The word “tangible” has multiple meanings. Merriam-Webster defines tangible as 1a : capable of being perceived especially by the sense of touch : palpable
b : substantially real : material
2: capable of being precisely identified or realized by the mind <her grief was tangible>
3: capable of being appraised at an actual or approximate value <tangible assets>

While the Copyright Office’s definition of ‘tangible’ is most likely #3, the 2D IP community’s definition of ‘tangible’ include #1 and #2.

The loose definition of a "tangible medium of expression," that "can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device” must make Legislators aware the cost of commerce that has become a ‘nothing we can do about it anyway’ conversation amongst both individuals and entities financially impacted by the Technological Invasion of Intellectual Property Rights taking place on the Internet, through PDAs, through the Cables and Fibers, the 3G, 4G and 5G systems that share owned IP, without authorization at lightning speed, predicted to go even faster. A simple enough example to point to are Avatars. Avatars are the new name for teeny image icons that come to represent the sender or receiver of IP, and others. A six year old boy can choose as his Avatar an aging actress like Bette Midler or a hot momma like Beyonce. A 90 year old woman can use as her Avatar, RGIII. These image uses are both unauthorized use of Midler’s and III’s ID and IP, along with being unauthorized use of Midler and III’s IP, their face and name the celeb makes money off, which is the third theft, Commerce. While these Unauthorized Uses impact CEO’s and individuals, the loss of bank to a newly graduated art school student can be greatly different from the loss of bank to the CEO and his corporation. The art school student saddled with Student Loans is graduated in a career they struggle to work in while the CEO’s POV is the free dissemination of RGIII’s face all over the Internet is publicity, albeit free, but will bring in fans, aid ticket sales, merchandising etc. Truthfully, it is a ding in the company’s bottom dollar but, as both the artist and CEO say, unless something is down by Congress understanding the fall our from Search Engine abuse of Safe Harbor, the company will struggle to maintain control of their Celeb image, suing when it makes sense since suing a 90 Medicare granny with nothing to get, doesn’t make sense. As for the art school student with a Mortgage but no house? Their choice being art supplies or suing a big company or someone who may be using a pseudoname on the internet? The student will try to draw their way happy.

[ TITLE 17 ] As a basic condition of copyright protection, the bill perpetuates the existing requirement that a work be fixed in a "tangible medium of expression," and adds that this medium may be one "now known or later developed," and that the fixation is sufficient if the work "can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.”…

<>

[ CD ] The FCC, the FTC or even Congress are already challenged by Google and other technological entities. Google Glass is technology’s game changer. Search engines are preserving private data. Google, itself, states it is “difficult to keep personal information off the web” http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=164133 Nothing is private. Records, now known to be saved on the search engines locations, can be shared with law enforcement and government. http://www.kimpl.com/568/alternative-search-engines-protect-privacy/ There is no “privacy anymore. There is “memory” frozen in computer- things legislators may care to forget.

[ TITLE 17 ] Thus, assuming it is copyrightable.... On the other hand, the definition of "fixation" would exclude from the concept purely evanescent or transient reproductions such as those projected briefly on a screen, shown electronically on a television or other cathode ray tube, or captured momentarily in the "memory" of a computer.

<>

[ CD ] The Title 17 definitions of “authorship”, “copy” and “book” appear to be deficient in that the definitions as expected to be used here are not in sync with common place/every day/ workplace vernacular. It is important the language of Title 17 speak to the everyday person to mitigate issues and to encourage understanding of a lawyer language heavy law. Moreso, as indicated with the definition of “Book,” there are multiple uses of the word that, without clarification and exact statement of how “Book” is intended for use in Title 17, can cause intentional abuse or unintentional misuse ie. matchbooks. Technology has introduced ebooks a new platform for literary works to appear in ie. by app, by license, by sharing, etc.

Merriam-Webster Definition of “Authorship” is
1: the profession of writing
2: the source (as the author) of a piece of writing, music, or art
3: the state or act of writing, creating, or causing

Merriam-Webster Definition of “Copy” is
1: an imitation, transcript, or reproduction of an original work (as a letter, a painting, a table, or a dress)
2: one of a series of especially mechanical reproductions of an original impression; also : an individual example of such a reproduction
3 archaic : something to be imitated : model

4a : matter to be set especially for printing
b : something considered printable or newsworthy —used without an article <remarks that make good copy — Norman Cousins>
c : text especially of an advertisement
5: duplicate 1a <a copy of a computer file> <a copy of a gene>

Merriam-Webster offers multiple definitions of “Book.” The definitions of “Book” relevant to Title 17 are:
1a : a set of written sheets of skin or paper or tablets of wood or ivory
b : a set of written, printed, or blank sheets bound together into a volume
c : a long written or printed literary composition
d : a major division of a treatise or literary work
e : a record of a business's financial transactions or financial condition —often used in plural <the books show a profit>
f : magazine 4a
g : e-book

2 capitalized : Bible 1

3: something that yields knowledge or understanding <the great book of nature> <her face was an open book>
4a (1) : the total available knowledge and experience that can be brought to bear on a task or problem <tried every trick in the book> (2) : inside information or analysis <the book on him is that he can't hit a curveball>
b : the standards or authority relevant in a situation <run by the book>
6a : libretto
b : the script of a play
c : a book of arrangements for a musician or dance orchestra : musical repertory
7: a packet of items bound together like a book <a book of stamps> <a book of matches>

Also needing to be understood, here, is that books are still hand printed on presses similar to the Guttenberg Press, an innovation inspired by the wine press. Books are still hand made both as One-Of-A-Kinds and in handmade Limited Editions of 2 to whatever. Editions can be as exact as handmade can be. Editions can be as creative as copies can be- each ‘copy’ modified with something different ie. paper, texture, attachment, deletion and so on as goes the interpretive, creative, artistic process Title 17 is supposed to protect.

[ TITLE 17 ] Under this definition "copies" and "phonorecords" …Thus, in the sense of the bill, a "book" is not a work of authorship, but is a particular kind of "copy."…

<>

Categories of Copyrightable Works
[ CD ] The three dimensional design, a chair with four legs, or a pedestal table might include unique elements to the legs, the chair back or the table pedestal base that are worthy of being copyrighted ie elements that are artforms ie a table with prosthetics for legs or a table pedestal that are stacked books and a cat form, for example technically four legs or one pod but an artist’s interpretation

[ TITLE 17 ] …And, even if the three-dimensional design contains some such element (for example, a carving on the back of a chair or a floral relief design on silver flatware), copyright protection would extend only to that element, and would not cover the over-all configuration of the utilitarian article as such.

<>

[ CD ] Accuracy in terms is important element in creating Law.

Technology and digital amalgamation have facilitated confusion of understanding the difference between lettering and typography. Lettering and typography are different concepts. Lettering and typography are not the same. They are similar in that they deal with letters. Lettering is almost exclusively used as display text. Typography was, and has continued to be, primarily the skill of setting type. Type are prefabricated characters.

Lettering and calligraphy have been around since the days of the Ancient Egyptians. The Ancient Egyptians used hieroglyphs. Calligraphy, the art of writing letters, is based on penmanship. Lettering, drawing letters, is based on draftsmanship. The art of engraving evolved alongside lettering and calligraphy. Lettering is the Art of Drawing Letters, creating letter-shapes. Lettering is done with pens, graphite or brushes by hand, creating, for the most part, non repeatable letterforms for a specific use or purpose instead of using ‘template’ type. Graffiti is lettering defined as, “Writing or drawings scribbled, scratched, or sprayed illicitly on a wall or other surface in a public place,” is art. http://www.graffiti.org/dc/dc_1.html Art is a creative and productive form of expression. Graffiti is lettering art is done without property owner’s permission. The difference between art and graffiti is that graffiti is an art, writing, drawing, or symbols created by use of a variety of materials such as automotive car paint, spray paint, crayons and permanent ink applied to any surface done on property with the permission of the property owner. Because graffiti damages property, graffiti is vandalism, a crime.

Typography uses template type, previously designed letters which are offered in programs for use on PCs, PDAs. Typography, letters applied to typefaces, is a product of the movable type printing system that Johannes Gutenberg’s press revolutionized in 1439. The concept of typography was moving ahead albeit slowly. Gutenberg was inspired to create his printing press after watching a winepress being operated. Typography emerged. Typesetters set type character by character. Each letter sat on its own type block. Typography is the interaction of letterforms style, arrangement or appearance that eventually go to press. Typography can include type design. Terms used back then are still used today.

The difference between lettering and typography used to be a paint brush and letterpress machine. Today, the same technology and computer programs can be used to create both lettering and typography. While technology and computer programs will never create calligraphy, an art form created by hand, calligraphy can be replicated into a styled font used by and disseminated through technology and computer programs.

Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices, Typography and calligraphy, section 503.02(a), says that fonts are not copyrightable in themselves. Typeface was copyrightable in and around 1916. English and Irish copyright law cover typeface. A font is copyrightable if it adds some level of protectable expression to the typeface. but that protection does not extend to the underlying uncopyrightable typeface itself, 17 U.S.C. 102(b) “(b) In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.”

Fonts should be copyrightable because a font is a “a set of type of one particular face and size.” Typeface is “a particular design of type.” Fonts is an often misused term today. [ Attachment 2 ] Fonts are an assortment or set of type. Some commonly used typefaces include Helvetica, Arial, Roman. Typefaces can be set as italic, bold, bold italic and in different sizes called picas. The fonts were cast metal then used as a template for printing. Today, some designers create their letter works directly in computer programs such as Adobe Illustrator. The technological and digital world stores fonts are digitized into images that can be scaled and modified for printing on electronic printers or digital phototypesetters and emerging technologies.

Merriam-Webster definition of “Font”
1: an assortment or set of type or characters all of one style and sometimes one size

Merriam-Webster definition of “Typeface”
1: the face of printing type
2: all type of a single design

Merriam-Webster definition of “Typography”
1: letterpress printing
2: the style, arrangement, or appearance of typeset matter

Merriam-Webster definition of “Printing”
1: the process of setting material in type or into a form to be used in printing; also : the process of producing graphic matter (as through a computer system)

[ TITLE 17 ] …The Committee has considered, but chosen to defer, the possibility of protecting the design of typefaces. A "typeface" can be defined as a set of letters, numbers, or other symbolic characters, whose forms are related by repeating design elements consistently applied in a notational system and are intended to be embodied in articles whose intrinsic utilitarian function is for use in composing text or other cognizable combinations of characters. The Committee does not regard the design of typeface, as thus defined, to be a copyrightable "pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work" within the meaning of this bill and the application of the dividing line in section 101.

<>

Nature of Copyright
[ CD ] Interpretation of Section 102(b) can be read that in the context of the new single Federal system of copyright, that the basic dichotomy between expression and idea remains unchanged. Copyright protection has been reduced by the push to interpret Copyright Law in ways that favor technology and new innovation by continuing to chop away at an IP creator’s Property Rights.

[ TITLE 17 ] Section 102(b) in no way enlarges or contracts the scope of copyright protection under the present law.

<>

Section 103
Will 3D printing, also called “additive manufacturing” fall in to the category of “derivative works”? 3D printing is presenting difficult intellectual property issues to the legislatures and courts. 3D printing deposits material such as plastic in successive layers until a desired shape is produced. The concern is people will infringe on others’ Intellectual property will file-share, knowingly or unknowingly without authorization. Rights holders would find it difficult to detect, investigate, and pursue litigation for even a single act of copying. 3D printers and home 3D printers will make it easier for people to infringe copyright and patents and get away with the violation.

[ TITLE 17 ] …Between them the terms "compilations" and "derivative works" ….A "derivative work," on the other hand, requires a process of recasting, transforming, or adapting "one or more preexisting works"; the "preexisting work" must come within the general subject matter of copyright set forth in section 102, regardless of whether it is or was ever copyrighted.

<>

[ CD ] Bill should be Capitalized throughout Title 17 with a “B” not lower case “b”

[ TITLE 17 ] The second part of the sentence that makes up section 103(a) deals with the status of a compilation or derivative work unlawfully employing preexisting copyrighted material. In providing that protection does not extend to "any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully," the Bill …

104—Subject Matter of Copyright: National Origin
(a) Unpublished Works.
[ CD ] Google’s Internet-connected glasses wearable computing, devices that can record everything going on around them with a wink or subtle click, Glass invades people’s privacy. Memoto, a tiny automatic camera that looks like a pin snaps two photos a minute before uploading to an online service. Memoto comes with a year free storage and “a searchable and shareable photographic memory.” In the pipeline are Apple’s iWatch, ‘heads-up display’ and other patents being filed intended to capture people’s lives even if the people do not want their IP and ID captured. Advocate Jeff Jarvis, a journalism professor at the City University of New York says “I don’t want you telling me that I can’t take pictures in public without your permission” citing the same resistance existed when Kodak began. Albeit true, reminding wearable computer advocates there is a commercial value to one’s ID and IP, they will be violating and liable for, same as there is to unwanted photos taken with iPhones and other technologies that, in violation of privacy statutes on the books ie. harassment, stalking, etc. inappropriately compromise perceived privacy while being in a private place such as bathrooms, wink, click, wink.

[ TITLE 17 ] The works specified by sections 102 and 103, while unpublished, are subject to protection under this title without regard to the nationality or domicile of the author.

§ 104A—Copyright in restored works

[ CD ] Restoration was a slower, more arduous process before technology facilitated faster, professional techniques by using computer programs such as Photoshop for digitally retouching, restoring, repairing are the same techniques for enhancing, duplicating and replicating new and old works that are flawed, dusty, scratched, torn, wrinkled, discolored, stained and heavily spotted photos, artwork, pages. 3D printing worries IP creators, too, with 3D printing presenting the ability to replicate copyrighted Works without license, undetected.

Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of “Restoration”
1: an act of restoring or the condition of being restored: as
a : a bringing back to a former position or condition : reinstatement <the restoration of peace>
c : a restoring to an unimpaired or improved condition <the restoration of a painting>
d : the replacing of missing teeth or crowns

2: something that is restored; especially : a representation or reconstruction of the original form (as of a fossil or a building)

Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of “Repair”

1a : to restore by replacing a part or putting together what is torn or broken : fix <repair a shoe>
b : to restore to a sound or healthy state : renew<repair his strength>
2: to make good : compensate for : remedy <repair a gap in my reading>

Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of “Retouch”
1: to rework in order to improve : touch up
2: to alter (as a photographic negative) to produce a more desirable appearance
3: to color (new growth of hair) to match previously dyed, tinted, or bleached hair
intransitive verb

[ TITLE 17 ] (a) Automatic Protection and Term (1) Term.--
(A) Copyright subsists, in accordance with this section, in restored works, and vests automatically on the date of restoration.
(B) Any work in which copyright is restored under this section shall subsist for the remainder of the term of copyright that the work would have otherwise been granted in the United States if the work never entered the public domain in the United States.

<>

(c) Filing of Notice of Intent to Enforce Restored Copyright Against Reliance Parties [ CD ] “Reliance parties” and “Restoration” run the slippery slope Fair Use presents in that Fair Use limits how much of an image can be used and Reliance Parties brings to question who owns the image after restoration.

[ TITLE 17 ] On or after the date of restoration, any person who owns a copyright in a restored work or an exclusive right therein may file with the Copyright Office a notice of intent to enforce that person's copyright or exclusive right or may serve such a notice directly on a reliance party. Acceptance of a notice by the Copyright Office is effective as to any reliance parties but shall not create a presumption of the validity of any of the facts stated therein. Service on a reliance party is effective as to that reliance party and any other reliance parties with actual knowledge of such service and of the contents of that notice.

<>

(2) Enforcement of copyright in restored works as against reliance parties…
[ CD ] Refer above

[ TITLE 17 ] (A)(i) The owner of the restored copyright (or such owner's agent) or the owner of an exclusive right therein (or such owner's agent) files with the Copyright Office, during the 24-month period beginning on the date of restoration, a notice of intent to enforce the restored copyright; and
(ii)(I) the act of infringement commenced after the end of the 12-month period beginning on the date of publication of the notice in the Federal Register;
(II) the act of infringement commenced before the end of the 12-month period described in subclause (I) and continued after the end of that 12-month period, in which case remedies shall be available only for infringement occurring after the end of that 12-month period; or

<>

(3) Existing derivative works.--
[ CD ] Refer below to Theft: India, a signatory of the Berne Convention,
[ Attachment 3 ] addresses IP theft as a criminal activity overseen by the District Court. This is a model the United States should consider. Expression is ‘one cannot be a little bit pregnant.’ Theft is theft. http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=208015#LinkTarget_598

China and India made efforts to upgrade their judicial systems to protect IPRs, taking steps to cut down, if not cut off, IPR theft at the get go. China and India realized that, in order to prevent infringement on intellectual property, courts in their countries had to step up criminal enforcement regarding intellectual property cases. China established IPR court Judges experienced in IP law and expert in civil, criminal, administrative procedure laws. My statement of fact remains consistent- my statement of fact that Theft is Theft- irregardless of it being theft of a car, theft of Bling Bling from the Cannes film festival or theft of Intellectual Property, a Property Right acknowledged by the Founding Fathers. India established IPR courts that move matters first into criminal before stepping into litigation. The Government of India in the Ministry of Commerce and Industry constituted an Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB), headquartered in Chennai, with sittings at Mumbai, Delhi, Kolkata and Ahmedabad. Appeals pending before the various High Courts transfer to the IPAB.

China initiated a pilot project centralizing adjudication of intellectual property cases with, by the end of 2012, 5 high people’s courts, 59 intermediate people’s courts and 69 grass-root courts. In 2012, China handled 13,104 IPR-related criminal cases, detained more than 60,000 suspects and concluded 43,000 cases IPR infringement related cases including production and selling of substandard commodities. Value? RMB11.3 billion.

My recommendation to merge Art School students together with Law School students to create a new career track for IPR, intellectual property resolution seems to be on point for IPR resolution. I filed this comment in the Register of Copyrights Small Claims Comment period, http://www.copyright.gov/docs/smallclaims/comments/noi_02263013/Devorah-Carrie.pdf presenting an understanding why Small Claims Courts don’t work for 2D IP Creators.

Theft done by “clickjacking”, “typosquatting”, “Click and Drag”, photograph and scan then sent over wires and cables and another newly emerging Transmission possibilities is a Federal Crime. Federal crime done over the wires has expressed adress. Data transmission has shifted from wires to to cable which brings with it a seriousness of criminality. Data transmission will probably shift again so that aspect of the law must be updated to include projected means of data transmission ie who would have thought a few years back that bumping cell phones would share data or that handheld card swipes in restaurants would facilitate data theft. Of what to do, well, you can either go after the individual junkies or go after their dealer. At this time, the dealers for data theft are the ISPs, the search engines, who provide the platforms from which data is being stolen.

The step, in concert, is looking at how each of the signatories on the Berne Convention adress Copyright theft. Tossing a Comment period to the public is one approach to addressing resolution of this global crime. One cannot reinvent the wheel. It is done. One can improve upon the wheel. A more expeditious approach is to have a point-by-point comparison done on all issue approaches of Berne Convention signatories [ Attachment 3 ] Then, having an idea of “piles”, grouped approaches, one sees methodically what has been working or not and then presents these results to the Public for Comment on and/or improved suggestions.

India, a signer of the Berne Convention, enforces IP theft quickly under the Criminal Law. http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=208015

Which is the court having jurisdiction over civil remedies in copyright cases? http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=208015#LinkTarget_598

The District Court concerned has the jurisdiction in civil suits regarding copyright infringement.

“Is copyright infringement a criminal offence? http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=208015#LinkTarget_598

Yes. Any person who knowingly infringes or abets the infringement of the copyright in any work commits criminal offence under Section 63 of the Copyright Act.

What are the punishments for a criminal offence under the copyright law?

The minimum punishment for infringement of copyright is imprisonment for six months with the minimum fine of Rs. 50,000/-. In the case of a second and subsequent conviction the minimum punishment is imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. one lakh.

Is copyright infringement a cognizable offence?

Any police officer, not below the rank of a sub inspector, may, if he is satisfied that an offence in respect of the infringement of copyright in any work has been, is being, or is likely to be committed, seize without warrant, all copies of the work and all plates used for the purpose of making infringing copies of the work, wherever found, and all copies and plates so seized shall, as soon as practicable be produced before a magistrate. “

Simply, if one follows the Berne Convention, that IP belongs to the Copyright Creator then the matter is simplified to ‘if it isn’t yours don’t touch it no matter HOW badly you want to use it and do what the Founding Fathers intended, be innovative and do it yourself.’ If you cant and use what belongs to someone else, then you have stolen, which is already covered under Crimes Against Property nationally [ Attachment 4 ] and in individual states [ Attachment 5 ] What has been presented to the Committee on The Judiciary addressing IP, looking back through the history has become a way remove Property Rights given by the Founding Father. Intellectual Property is Property. There was no time limit on what the Founding Fathers gave to the new America. Not only is a time limit being sought by proponents seeking to limit IP ownership, proponents are clear stating nothing should be owned. IP are family heirlooms and treasures. Removing ownership of IP will allow everyone to approach anyone to remove from them what is wanted under the claim “you owned it long enough.” IP will be removed from the walls of Congress, museums, private homes because Congress is giving people that ability.

Creative Commons, www.creativecommons.org, is referenced multiple times in the CPP, Copyright Principles Project presented to Congress www.law.berkeley.edu/files/bclt_CPP.pdf‎ . Creative Commons position is stated “The idea of universal access to research, education, and culture is made possible by the Internet, but our legal and social systems don’t always allow that idea to be realized. Copyright was created long before the emergence of the Internet, and can make it hard to legally perform actions we take for granted on the network: copy, paste, edit source, and post to the Web” stating Copyright Law is a default setting making persons/entities takes steps to “have explicit permission, granted IN ADVANCE, whether you’re an artist, teacher, scientist, librarian, policymaker, or just a regular user.” Creative Commons took upon itself the ambition “To achieve the vision of universal access, someone needed to provide a free, public, and standardized infrastructure that creates a balance between the reality of the Internet and the reality of copyright laws.” The reality of Copyright Law is Intellectual Property is a Property Right granted by the Founding Fathers. Creative Commons approach to Use of IP, in China and India, if the images originated in those countries, for example, will make Criminals out of people accepting Creative Commons presentation of ‘Take First Ask Questions Second.’ Taking without asking reduces chances of working together towards compromise. Taking another’s Property without asking is a step in the direction of becoming a Criminal, in countries signatory to the Berne Convention.

[ TITLE 17 ] (B) In the absence of an agreement between the parties, the amount of such compensation shall be determined by an action in United States district court, and shall reflect any harm to the actual or potential market for or value of the restored work from the reliance party’s continued exploitation of the work, as well as compensation for the relative contributions of expression of the author of the restored work and the reliance party to the derivative work.

<>

(f) Immunity from Warranty and Related Liability
[ CD ] The Internet offers instant publication along with instant removal from the location of the Author publishing their Intellectual Property on to the World Wide Web. The areas the Intellectual Property is removed to will not be known as search engines tend to produce search results endemic to the location of the search originator ie. a person researching their work from a location in New York will get different results from that same person researching their Work while in California or Italy or elsewhere hence all Unauthorized Uses of IP may not be known for a while if ever.

[ TITLE 17 ] (i) the eligible country in which the work is first published, or

(ii) if the restored work is published on the same day in 2 or more eligible countries, the eligible country which has the most significant contacts with the work.

§ 105—Subject matter of copyright: United States Government works

[ CD ] Are USPS stamp designs intended to not be protected copyright under this title. Stamps are commerce. Countries like Jamaica are dependent upon sale of stamps ie Disney to produce revenue for their country(ies)

The Architect of the Capitol, currently, The Honorable Stephen T. Ayers, FAIA, LEED AP, addresses restrictive use of images released from the architect’s office although stating the images are in the Public Domain the images may be used only, with restrictions, inconsistent with the definition of Public Domain.

Merriam-Webster definition of “Public Domain”
2: the realm embracing property rights that belong to the community at large, are unprotected by copyright or patent, and are subject to appropriation by anyone

“These images are in the public domain and, unless otherwise noted, may be used without permission for educational, scholarly, or personal (i.e., nonpromotional, nonadvertising) purposes. When any of these images is used in print or electronic publications, the photographic credit line should read “Architect of the Capitol.” If an image requires additional use permission, a note to that effect appears on the relevant download page. These images may not be used in any way that would imply endorsement by the Architect of the Capitol or the United States Congress of a product, service, or point of view. Photographs from the records of the Architect of the Capitol may be used for scholarly or educational purposes; they are not made available for promotional or advertising purposes. For information about ordering images and permission to publish, please contact us through our web form or fax a letter identifying the image that you would like to use and the purpose for which you wish to use it to..” http://www.aoc.gov/image-gallery...”

The Register of Copyright answers   http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-definitions.html
“Where is the public domain?
”The public domain is not a place. A work of authorship is in the “public domain” if it is no longer under copyright protection or if it failed to meet the requirements for copyright protection. Works in the public domain may be used freely without the permission of the former copyright owner.”

By definition of Public Domain, the AOC has incorrectly been asserting control of AOC images and Intellectual Property, generated through the AOC office, that the AOC cannot assert restrictions on or of.

Government officials ie Secretary of Labor, Treasury, Vice President, President, VPotus and Potus spouses have staff working for them generating IP- journalists/speech writers, photographers/videographers. Under Title 17 these persons with unique access to participating in and archiving moments of history are producing books and other items. Do those items belong to the people hence head to NARA or all those staff Work-For-Hire staff and is that staff allowed to profit from their IP generated while they were employees of the government even in advance of Presidential (ie) papers being released to the public. Is there a time distance from date of leaving government employ that employee must wait to use that IP gained from their access to moments peer community ie. pool photographers, freelance and independent photographers were barred from participating in.

[ TITLE 17 ] Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government, but the United States Government is not precluded from receiving and holding copyrights transferred to it by assignment, bequest, or otherwise.

<>

Works of the United States Postal Service
[ CD ] If the USPS and the AOC can claim copyright and restriction of use of their Intellectual Property than should legislators, too, claim ownership and restriction to use of the Image and/or name to mitigate abuse, online and otherwise, of their image and mitigate abuse to their name/character by persons, known and unknown, that legislators are subject to as technology advances providing continuing opportunities for ID theft and online bullying/slander. Protection of Images would also provide protection to military and law enforcement currently being targeted by gangs taking their photo on cell phones and other devices then putting the military and officers images on ie Pinterest as “wanted” posters facilitating attacks on these individuals

[ TITLE 17 ] The intent of section 105 [this section] is to ...

<>

General Scope of Copyright
[ CD ] The Digital Millennium Copyright Act safe harbor provisions protect Internet Service providers from the consequences of their users' actions after having adopted and implemented termination policies appropriate for repeat infringers.

The Safe Harbor statute reduces or eliminates the ISP’s liability under the law but does not exempt the ISP’s when the ISP is the infringer, as in the case of the ISP Image Galleries. Google Images, Google’s image gallery, introduced in July 2001, allows users to search the Web for image content by using keywords using text accompanying the image. By July 2010, Google were receiving over 1 billion views each day with users looking at image Thumbnails then increased in size able to be printed, in further violation of Copyright Law, to ‘Medium’, ‘Large’ or ‘Actual Size.’ Google Images followed up with Reverse Image Searches that allow users to Drag & Drop images on to the search bar, choosing a URL or right clicking the image. Google followed with Google Goggles, a downloadable Image Recognition App used to search by pictures taken by handheld devices. The Google Goggle App will search for information about the Image.

The ISP’s allege Fair Use. This is not Fair Use. Merriam-Webster definition of Fair Use is: a legal doctrine that portions of copyrighted materials may be used without permission of the copyright owner provided the use is fair and reasonable, does not substantially impair the value of the materials, and does not curtail the profits reasonably expected by the owner. Shepherd Fairey used Google Images to locate the AP photo of Obama from which Fairey created his iconic Obama ‘Hope’ poster. AP sued Fairey for credit and compensation Unauthorized Use of an owner’s copyright is at a loss of Commerce to the Copyright owner. Unauthorized Use of an owner’s copyright is at a gain to the ISP valuations. Google’s valuation is about $249.9 billion. Microsoft’s valuation is about $247.2 billion.    Chilling Effects Clearinghouse posted, without the Author’s permission, a Take Down Request sent December 26, 2010 by email, to Google Legal Support         [ Attachment 14 ] . DMCA Counter Notification Original notices of the Copyright violation were sent Snail Mail. Google responded by email requesting the Take Down notice be resent by email. Elements of the Take Down letter were posted on line, including “How dare you publicise where I live, email information, phone numbers, etc, exposing me to Identity Theft.” Chilling Effects Clearinghouse, without requesting from the Author permission to post the email on line, did so, exposing the Author of the Intellectual Property, the email, to potential abuse by 3rd parties. Chilling Effects Clearinghouse added to the Original Letter additional personal details of the Author, enough personal details to be of concern. The Author’s presumption of Privacy and Etiquette were removed. Chilling Effects Clearinghouse describes themselves as “a unique collaboration among law school clinics and the Electronic Frontier Foundation.” explains their actions by

The Chilling Effects Clearinghouse, self described as “a unique collaboration among law school clinics and the Electronic Frontier Foundation posted on line “collects and analyzes legal complaints about online activity, helping Internet users to know their rights and understand the law. Chilling Effects welcomes submission of letters from individuals and from Internet service providers and hosts. These submissions enable us to study the prevalence of legal threats and allow Internet users to see the source of content removals.” http://chillingeffects.org/about This raises the observation that Chilling Effects Clearinghouse is at question of Unauthorized Use of a Creators Intellectual Property, can be argued, complicit, in this case, with Google for putting on “display” on the Internet, similar to a gallery, Intellectual Property the Owner did not state, they gave up the Rights to, upon hitting “click.” Current term of IP Ownership is Life+70. Electronic Frontier Foundation representatives state Life+70 is too long, believing the term of IP Ownership should be shorter IF “at all.” Chilling Effects Clearinghouse failed to state the date the Author’s Take Down letter
https://www.chillingeffects.org/notice.cgi?NoticeID=54031 was posted online to their site, in a Public/global setting.

Use of the Author’s IP was Unauthorized, a violation and also a behaviour outside of the boundary of Safe Harbor .

Life+ 70 isnt etched in stone either. Perpetual copyrights and patents are prohibited. The exact words used are "limited times.” But in Eldred v. Ashcroft (2003), the Supreme Court ruled that repeated extensions to the term of copyright does not constitute a perpetual copyright. SCOTUS rejected a challenge to the "Mickey Mouse Protection Act” also known as the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act. Justice Ginsburg wrote the Act provided limited renewal terms and, just like Congress grants retroactive extensions, “limited times” was not violated, basically, the Constitution gives Congress discretion to set and extend copyright protections at will. The American people’s trust that the same law applies to everyone was violated. The different law applies to corporations, should apply to people. Extend the copyrights. Better yet, remove all limitations on ownership by defining Copyright as a family heirloom or treasure- Property. Otherwise- release everyone’s Property to a public grab after Life+70.

The five fundamental rights that the bill gives to copyright owners—the exclusive rights of reproduction, adaptation, publication, performance, and display—are stated generally in section 106. These exclusive rights, which comprise the so-called "bundle of rights" that is a copyright, are cumulative and may overlap in some cases. Each of the five enumerated rights may be subdivided indefinitely and, as discussed below in connection with section 201, each subdivision of an exclusive right may be owned and enforced separately.

<>

[ CD ] This example addressing Motion Pictures should be applied for IP protection of 2D Intellectual Property creators- literary, artistic, photographic.

[ TITLE 17 ] ….The exclusive rights accorded to a copyright owner under section 106 are "to do and to authorize" any of the activities specified in the five numbered clauses. Use of the phrase "to authorize" is intended to avoid any questions as to the liability of contributory infringers. For example, a person who lawfully acquires an authorized copy of a motion picture would be an infringer if he or she engages in the business of renting it to others for purposes of unauthorized public performance.

<>

Rights of Reproduction, Adaptation, and Publication
[ CD ] The first three clauses of section 106, which cover all rights under a copyright except those of performance and display, extend to every kind of copyrighted work.

[ TITLE 17 ] The exclusive rights encompassed by these clauses, though closely related, are independent; they can generally be characterized as rights of copying, recording, adaptation, and publishing. A single act of infringement may violate all of these rights at once, as where a publisher reproduces, adapts, and sells copies of a person's copyrighted work as part of a publishing venture. Infringement takes place when any one of the rights is violated: where, for example, a printer reproduces copies without selling them or a retailer sells copies without having anything to do with their reproduction.

<>

Reproduction
[ CD ] Refer to “GENERAL SCOPE OF COPYRIGHT” (above)

[ TITLE 17 ] Read together with the relevant definitions in section 101…As under the present law, a copyrighted work would be infringed by reproducing it in whole or in any substantial part, and by duplicating it exactly or by imitation or simulation. Wide departures or variations from the copyrighted work would still be an infringement as long as the author's "expression" rather than merely the author's "ideas" are taken. An exception to this general principle, applicable to the reproduction of copyrighted sound recordings, is specified in section 114.

<>

[ CD ] This declaration of “showing of images on a screen or tube would not be a violation of clause” is no longer valid in the world of youtube, mobile and other PDA’s moreso knowing the ISPs are copying and keeping copies of Users Intellectual Property http://www.google.com/about/datacenters/gallery/#/all [ TITLE 17 ] "Reproduction" … Thus, the showing of images on a screen or tube would not be a violation of clause (1), although it might come within the scope of clause (5).

§ 106A—Rights of certain authors to attribution and integrity
(a) Rights of Attribution and Integrity
[ CD ] Refer to “GENERAL SCOPE OF COPYRIGHT” (above)

[ TITLE 17 ] Subject to section 107 and independent of the exclusive rights provided in section 106, the author of a work of visual art--
(1) shall have the right--
(A) to claim authorship of that work, and
(B) to prevent the use of his or her name as the author of any work of visual art which he or she did not create;

<>

[ CD ] Refer to “GENERAL SCOPE OF COPYRIGHT” (above)

[ TITLE 17 ] (2) shall have the right to prevent the use of his or her name as the author of the work of visual art in the event of a distortion, mutilation, or other modification of the work which would be prejudicial to his or her honor or reputation; and

[ CD ] Refer to “GENERAL SCOPE OF COPYRIGHT” (above)

[ TITLE 17 ] (3) …(A) to prevent any intentional distortion, mutilation, or other modification of that work which would be prejudicial to his or her honor or reputation, and any intentional distortion, mutilation, or modification of that work is a violation of that right, and

[ CD ] Refer to “GENERAL SCOPE OF COPYRIGHT” (above)

[ TITLE 17 ] (B) to prevent any destruction of a work of recognized stature, and any intentional or grossly negligent destruction of that work is a violation of that right.

(c) Exceptions
[ CD ] Visual Arts are a misnomer. A more correct term is The Arts includes visual arts, auditory arts, performance arts and literary arts. Visual Art are creations we can look at such as drawing or a painting including but not limited to drawing, painting, sculpture, architecture, photography, film, printmaking. Decorative Arts are ceramics, furniture and interior design, jewelry making, metal crafting and wood working.

[ TITLE 17 ] (3) The rights described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a) shall not apply to any reproduction, depiction, portrayal, or other use of a work in, upon, or in any connection with any item described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of the definition of "work of visual art" in section 101, and any such reproduction, depiction, portrayal, or other use of a work is not a destruction, distortion, mutilation, or other modification described in paragraph (3) of subsection (a).

<>

(e) Transfer and Waiver
[ CD ] A transfer of rights is either Out Right Transfer, a sale and release of all claim to the IP, or a transfer of rights can be a bundling of a right(s) spelled out in a license agreement that clarifies what right is permitted, for where, for how long, and for how much.

[ TITLE 17 ] (2) Ownership of the rights …Transfer of ownership of any copy of a work of visual art, or of a copyright or any exclusive right under a copyright, shall not constitute a waiver of the rights conferred by subsection (a). Except as may otherwise be agreed by the author in a written instrument signed by the author, a waiver of the rights conferred by subsection (a) with respect to a work of visual art shall not constitute a transfer of ownership of any copy of that work, or of ownership of a copyright or of any exclusive right under a copyright in that work.

§ 107—Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use

[ CD ] Refer to “GENERAL SCOPE OF COPYRIGHT” (above)

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, …. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include--
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

House Report No. 94-1476 (Extract) General Background of the Problem
[ CD ] Refer to “GENERAL SCOPE OF COPYRIGHT” (above)

[ TITLE 17 ] The judicial doctrine of fair use… "quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author's observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report; reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported."

<>

[ CD ] Refer to “GENERAL SCOPE OF COPYRIGHT” (above)
* The definition of Fair Use has changed with the Internet being a concerning factor. Images are being used without permission as Avatars, on websites, petitions, twitter, pinterest and for causes

[ TITLE 17 ] Although the courts have considered and ruled upon the fair use doctrine…

<>

[ CD ] At question is who, in cases, is performing the activity in that the Internet provides anonymity to people who can and pretend to be anything, along with the Unauthorized Users of IP who bundle a Copyright Owners ID and IP into Pay-For-Access sites ie www.spokeo.com [ Attachment 6 ] or www.123people.com [ Attachment 7 ] in which the Unauthorized User has bundled ID and IP, without permission, often without knowledge. Question is can this activity, sale of an individual’s identity be adressed as Human Trafficking- sale of a person.

[ TITLE 17 ] The Committee has amended the first of the criteria to be considered—"the purpose and character of the use"—…. It is an express recognition that, as under the present law, the commercial or non-profit character of an activity, while not conclusive with respect to fair use, can and should be weighed along with other factors in fair use decisions.

<>

Intention as to Classroom Reproduction
[ CD ] Innocent teacher is difficult to accept in that teachers are understanding of Unauthorized Use of Copyright and the consequences of using something they do not have clarity on its availability. The approach to avoiding a charge of Unauthorized Use of Copyright is if the ownership is not clear nor accessible from which to get permission to use, then, don’t.

[ TITLE 17 ] The Committee also adheres … At the same time the Committee recognizes, as it did in 1967, that there is a "need for greater certainty and protection for teachers … also amended section 504(c) to provide innocent teachers and other non-profit users of copyrighted material with broad insulation against unwarranted liability for infringement. The latter amendments are discussed below in connection with Chapter 5 of the bill [Sec. 501 et seq. of this title].

<>

[ CD ] The “typical classroom situation” is an outdated concept in this generation of homeschooling, commuter classrooms, online course, classes that use computers instead of textbooks, along with iPads, cellphones and so on.

[ TITLE 17 ] In 1967 the Committee also sought to approach this problem by including, in its report, a very thorough discussion of "the considerations lying behind the four criteria listed in the amended section 107, in the context of typical classroom situations arising today."….

<>

Reproduction and Uses for Other Purposes
[ CD ] Few copyright owners would deny making a copy of their IP for blind persons. The Library of Congress is bound to the same obligations of Copyright Use as the public is bound to.

[ TITLE 17 ] For the most part, such copies and phonorecords are made by the Library of Congress' Division for the Blind and Physically Handicapped with permission obtained from the copyright owners, and are circulated to blind persons through regional libraries covering the nation….While the making of multiple copies or phonorecords of a work for general circulation requires the permission of the copyright owner, a problem addressed in section 710 of the bill, the making of a single copy or phonorecord by an individual as a free service for blind persons would properly be considered a fair use under section 107.

<>

[ CD ] This falls under Restoration NOT Fair Use.

Merriam-Webster Definition of “Fair Use”: a legal doctrine that portions of copyrighted materials may be used without permission of the copyright owner provided the use is fair and reasonable, does not substantially impair the value of the materials, and does not curtail the profits reasonably expected by the owner

Merriam-Webster Definition of “Restoration:
1: an act of restoring or the condition of being restored restored: as
a : a bringing back to a former position or condition : reinstatement <the restoration of peace>
b : restitution
c : a restoring to an unimpaired or improved condition <the restoration of a painting>
d : the replacing of missing teeth or crowns
2: something that is restored; especially : a representation or reconstruction of the original form (as of a fossil or a building)

Kodak publishes a guide on Restoring Photos addressing Marked, Altered and Unmarked images [ Attachment 8 ]

A problem of particular urgency is … The efforts of the Library of Congress, the American Film Institute, and other organizations to rescue and preserve this irreplaceable contribution to our cultural life are to be applauded, and the making of duplicate copies for purposes of archival preservation certainly falls within the scope of "fair use."

<>

[ CD ] Google’s valuation is about $249.9 billion. Microsoft’s valuation is about $247.2 billion.   Unauthorized Use of an owner’s copyright is at a loss of Commerce to the Copyright owner. Unauthorized Use of an owner’s copyright is at a gain to the ISP valuations.

[ TITLE 17 ] …. Copying by a profit-making user of even a small portion of a newsletter may have a significant impact on the commercial market for the work.:

<>

[ CD ] Each hand written/hand drawn letter in a Scribal art’s calligraphic piece is an artwork as is with work by a student or a teacher. That one is a teacher or a student is not a barometer in that many students skills surpass the skills of a teacher. They are both scribes and/or artists, creators of visual works of art.

Merriam-Webster definition of “Calligraphy”
1a : artistic, stylized, or elegant handwriting or lettering
b : the art of producing such writing
2: penmanship
3: an ornamental line in drawing or painting

[ TITLE 17 ] The Committee has examined the use of excerpts from copyrighted works in the art work of calligraphers. The committee believes that a single copy reproduction of an excerpt from a copyrighted work by a calligrapher for a single client does not represent an infringement of copyright. Likewise, a single reproduction of excerpts from a copyrighted work by a student calligrapher or teacher in a learning situation would be a fair use of the copyrighted work.

<>

[ CD ] It is important to enforce that each copy includes a Notice of Copyright

[ TITLE 17 ] C. Each copy includes a notice of copyright.

<>

[ CD ] There are standards for lengths of pieces- journalistic or literary. 144 letters is a twitter verse. Facebook/ Linkedin pieces are 250-500 letters, average. A blurb is under 100 words. Pieces can run 250 words, 300 words, 500 words, 650 words, 750 words, 1200 words, 2000 words and upwards on blogs and or in essays. 2500 words is an odd number to have cited

[ TITLE 17 ] (ii) Prose:

(a) Either a complete article, story or essay of less than 2,500 words, or…

<>

[ CD ] Two published pages of a three page special work is publishing 2/3rd’s of the literary work. More often 10% or a few paragraphs is adequate to cite and or promote or quote an author of text

[ TITLE 17 ] (iv) "Special" works: Certain works in poetry, prose or in "poetic prose" which often combine language with illustrations and which are intended sometimes for children and at other times for a more general audience fall short of 2,500 words in their entirety. Paragraph "ii" above notwithstanding such "special works" may not be reproduced in their entirety; however, an excerpt comprising not more than two of the published pages of such special work and containing not more than 10% of the words found in the text thereof, may be reproduced.

<>

[ CD ] Teacher’s teaching plans are (i) repeated class to class or (ii) submitted in advance for approval hence news reports on books allowed or banned from classes. With book banning a reality, spontaneity in teaching isn’t a real description of a teacher’s steps towards maximizing effective teaching done through submitting teaching plans for review.

[ TITLE 17 ] Spontaneity

(i) The copying is at the instance and inspiration of the individual teacher, and

(ii) The inspiration and decision to use the work and the moment of its use for maximum teaching effectiveness are so close in time that it would be unreasonable to expect a timely reply to a request for permission.

<>

[ CD ] Must provide Author’s copyright on the copied material, along with other attributions ie publisher, ISBN number, author’s names and year of publishing

[ TITLE 17 ] (i) The copying of the material is for only one course in the school in which the copies are made.

(ii) Not more than one short poem, article, story, essay or two excerpts may be copied from the same author, nor more than three from the same collective work or periodical volume during one class term.

(iii) There shall not be more than nine instances of such multiple copying for one course during one class term.

<>

III. Prohibitions as to I and II Above

[ CD ] Books, reprints and/or periodicals have suffered with the rapid response to the Internet as a resource along with the encouragement, by the administration, to encourage online education which does not rely on printed matter

[ TITLE 17 ] (C) Copying shall not:

(a) substitute for the purchase of books, publishers' reprints or periodicals;

(c) be repeated with respect to the same item by the same teacher from term to term.

<>

[ CD ] Removing an Author’s copyright notice from their Works indicates Intent to Steal. The removal of an author’s name and copyright notice is done daily by the ISP’s in their Image Galleries at a cost to the IP owner of loss of Commerce

[ TITLE 17 ] 5. Copying without inclusion of the copyright notice which appears on the printed copy.

<>

§ 108—Limitations on exclusive rights: Reproduction by libraries and archives
[ CD ] An employee may make the copy but there is no guarantee that someone will not take that one copy then maker further copies

[ TITLE 17 ] (a) Except as otherwise provided in this title and notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement of copyright for a library or archives, or any of its employees acting within the scope of their employment, to reproduce no more than one copy or phonorecord of a work…

<>

[ CD ] “Unpublished work” is a misnomer. Libraries battle for real estate for books in the market place that are requested by the reading community or are selected by librarians. Libraries then purge books through booksales/fundraisers. Libraries do not solicit nor regularly accept “unpublished works” that are duplicated ‘for the purpose of security or research.’ Unpublished books would most likely lack an authenticating process.

[ TITLE 17 ] (2) the collections of the library or archives are
(i) open to the public, or
(ii) available not only to researchers affiliated with the library or archives or with the institution of which it is a part, but also to other persons doing research in a specialized field; and

(3) the reproduction or distribution of the work includes a notice of copyright that appears on the copy
(b) The rights of reproduction and distribution under this section apply to three copies or phonorecords of an unpublished work duplicated solely for purposes of preservation and security or for deposit for research use in another library or archives of the type described by clause (2) of subsection (a), if--

<>

[ CD ] This clause lacks clarification of how the copy is made available to the public ie copied on a flashdrive then made available to the public, emailed from a personal PC or PDA brought in to the Library/Archive, copied with screen grabs then scanned and sent….? IF the copy is emailed through an ISP then it has lost its claim of privacy as it is being shared as Servers store email content then available to Law Enforcement and Warrants upon demand

[ TITLE 17 ] (2) any such copy or phonorecord that is reproduced in digital format is not otherwise distributed in that format and is not made available to the public in that format outside the premises of the library or archives.

<>

[ CD ] Need a definition of Reasonable Effort as well as a definition of Fair Price.

Definition of Fair value, also called fair price, in a commonplace conflation of the two distinct concepts, is a concept used in accounting

Definition of REASONABLE 1a : being in accordance with reason <a reasonable theory> b : not extreme or excessive <reasonable requests>
c : moderate, fair <a reasonable chance> <a reasonable price>
d : inexpensive

2a : having the faculty of reason
b : possessing sound judgment <a reasonable man>

[ TITLE 17 ] (1) the library or archives has, after a reasonable effort, determined that an unused replacement cannot be obtained at a fair price; and

<>

[ CD ] A machine is not rendered obsolete if not readily available in the commercial market. The machine is unavailable, possibly temporarily in that the newer generation is discovering what is old, bringing Old back as new ideas ie. modern versions of record players ie. iphones that can be plugged in the phone earpiece that looks like an old fashioned Ma Bell receiver

[ TITLE 17 ] For purposes of this subsection, a format shall be considered obsolete if the machine or device necessary to render perceptible a work stored in that format is no longer manufactured or is no longer reasonably available in the commercial marketplace.

<>

[ CD ] A copy, by definition of the Register of Copyrights, cannot become the property of the User unless the Copyright Owner assigns/licenses the Intellectual Property Rights, transferring the IP Rights as stated in the Agreement- one time use, multiple use, limited by time/territory/product, etc. Rights that are transferred for use through use of the Internet/cell phone/telephone/cable/wire etc are compromised by the ISPs /Search Engines who preserve copies of all transmissions through them

[ TITLE 17 ] (1) the copy or phonorecord becomes the property of the user, and the library or archives has had no notice that the copy or phonorecord would be used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research; and

[ CD ] Signs warning against Copyright Abuse are on display at cash registers in Kinko’s and other copy centers. These posted warnings are both ignored by staff and by users/readers intent on making the copies. While it would be ideal to have a sign in on/in the machines commemorating the user understands the Terms of Use, the reality is this wont happen moreso because there may not be an adequate number of Counter service reps to both adress Customer Needs behind the register as the same time acting as Copyright Police within the establishment. service counter. Moreso, copy center staff, more often does not have training on how to confront a client on Copyright Infringement hence reducing the Warning sign at the register to a Make It Look/Feel Like Something Is Being Done

[ TITLE 17 ] (2) the library or archives displays prominently, at the place where orders are accepted, and includes on its order form, a warning of copyright in accordance with requirements that the Register of Copyrights shall prescribe by regulation.

<>

[ CD ] The words “Reasonable Investigation” warrant a clearer interpretation for the public

[ TITLE 17 ] (e) The rights of reproduction and distribution under this section apply to the entire work, or to a substantial part of it, made from the collection of a library or archives where the user makes his or her request or from that of another library or archives, if the library or archives has first determined, on the basis of a reasonable investigation, that a copy or phonorecord of the copyrighted work cannot be obtained at a fair price, if

<>

[ CD ] This section is outdated in that it fails to adress that people have home copying machines. Technology has changed. Technology reflects changing mores. People, increasingly, have home offices.

[ TITLE 17 ] (f) Nothing in this section--
(1) shall be construed to impose liability for copyright infringement upon a library or archives or its employees for the unsupervised use of reproducing equipment located on its premises:
Provided, That such equipment displays a notice that the making of a copy may be subject to the copyright law;
(2) excuses a person who uses such reproducing equipment or who requests a copy or phonorecord under subsection (d) from liability for copyright infringement for any such act, or for any later use of such copy or phonorecord, if it exceeds fair use as provided by section 107;

<>

[ CD ] “Reasonable Investigation” has to be qualified- five minutes on the Internet, pulling papers filed with the Copyright Office, writing the last known state DMV to forward papers, online search using ie. Spokeo.com, 123people.com, Facebook, Linkedin, Twitter. Paperwork must be generated to show proof of search ie. Certified Return Receipt received back from the USPS (must state on the paper- reason sent (handwritten note), proof of email. Word of mouth or allegation without proof of Due Diligence is not acceptable

[ TITLE 17 ] (1)

(h)(1) For purposes of this section, during the last 20 years of any term of copyright of a published work, a library or archives, including a nonprofit educational institution that functions as such, may reproduce, distribute, display, or perform in facsimile or digital form a copy or phonorecord of such work, or portions thereof, for purposes of preservation, scholarship, or research, if such library or archives has first determined, on the basis of a reasonable investigation, that none of the conditions set forth in subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of paragraph (2) apply.

<>
[ CD ] A clearer definition of “normal Commercial exploitation” is needed.

The Merriam-Webster relevant definitions of “Normal” are:
2a : according with, constituting, or not deviating from a norm, rule, or principle
b : conforming to a type, standard, or regular pattern
3: occurring naturally <normal immunity>
4a : of, relating to, or characterized by average intelligence or development
b : free from mental disorder : sane
7: relating to, involving, or being a normal curve or normal distribution <normal approximation to the binomial distribution>

[ TITLE 17 ] 2) No reproduction, distribution, display, or performance is authorized under this subsection if--
(A) the work is subject to normal commercial exploitation;
(B) a copy or phonorecord of the work can be obtained at a reasonable price; or
(C) the copyright owner or its agent provides notice pursuant to regulations promulgated by the Register of Copyrights that either of the conditions set forth in subparagraphs (A) and (B) applies.

(3) The exemption provided in this subsection does not apply to any subsequent uses by users other than such library or archives...

<>

Amendment history … [ CD ] “Purely commercial enterprises” are establishing a “collection of copyrighted works,” calling themselves “a library or archive and engage in for-profit reproduction and distribution of photocopies”, albeit, Copyrighted Images with Unauthorized Use. Search Engines/ ISP’s, Internet Service Providers- Google [ Attachment 8 ], Bing (Microsoft)
[ Attachment 9 ], Yahoo [ Attachment 10 ], AOL [ Attachment 11 ], Baidu (China) [ Attachment 12 ], and countless other Search Engines I don’t know to search on, are distributing thousands of my Copyrighted Intellectual Property, originally used under license by a client but not licensed to the Search Engine IMAGE GALLERIES, as well as through bundling sites like www.spokeo.com [ Attachment 6 ], and www.123people.com [ Attachment 7 ], are released on the Internet without payment and clearly not license.

Looped into Carrie Devorah Image Gallery are Avatars of Facebook Friends and others, possibly putting me at Risk for Unauthorized Use of Social Networking Friends ID IP. The images/data/IP, even Watermarked Images, are being gathered by IP then used on the Search Engines/ISP’s without Authorization in violation of Copyright Law, in abuse of Safe Harbor. (Microsoft) Bing’s Image Gallery provideds Users of Bings Image Gallery opportunity to alter Images Bing gathered into the gallery under a person/entity/theme/subject. Images can be altered in Size, Color, Type, Layout and People as illustrated [ Attachment 9 ]. Search engines have argued defense of FAIR USE when sued in the courts for Unauthorized Use of Copyright. FAIR USE is using segment of the IP in a way that will not interfere with the Copyright Owners right to Commerce. [ Attachment 9 ] illustrates the exact image can be enlarged from the Thumbnail, an image in its entirety already a violation of the Copyright Owners’ Rights also showing the image was removed from another site, beyond and outside of the defense of Safe Harbor. Searchers for the Image can Purpose the image ie. “Add Friend, Subscribe.”

Persons/entities are given a Security Warning from, in this case Windows, asking “Are you sure you want to copy or move files to this folder” cautioned to “only copy or move files from location that you trust” before then moving the image, as illustrated with Sam Donaldson, from Bing Image gallery on to the desktop. The Anthony Weiner image used in Bing, removed/linked to an International site, is then removed from the site and as indicated, an Orphan Work is created. The identifying details have been removed. Bing has not licensed these images. Nor has AOL, Yahoo, Google or Baidu. A phenomenon that has emerged are Trolls. Trolls are online entities and/or persons who load Searchable Tag Words into their own IP or a Copyright Owner’s IP the Troll has removed from Search Engine galleries in Unauthorized Use. A simpler more relatable definition might be highwaymen who rob the carriages passing by. The Trolled IP is used by a party without license. The Troll bills the Intellectual Property’s Unauthorized User for use of the IP and/or threatens litigation. Trolling becomes a numbers game of ‘number of successful seductions of Tag Word loaded images’ v ‘number of successful payouts of the IP used without authorization.’ [ TITLE 17 ] Under this provision, a purely commercial enterprise could not establish a collection of copyrighted works, call itself a library or archive, and engage in for-profit reproduction and distribution of photocopies. Similarly, it would not be possible for a non-profit institution, by means of contractual arrangements with a commercial copying enterprise, to authorize the enterprise to carry out copying and distribution functions that would be exempt if conducted by the non-profit institution itself. <>

[ CD ] Definition of Systematic needs to be clarified.

Merriam-Webster Definition of Systematic:
1: relating to or consisting of a system
2: presented or formulated as a coherent body of ideas or principles <systematic thought>
3a : methodical in procedure or plan <a systematic approach> <a systematic scholar>
b : marked by thoroughness and regularity <systematic efforts>
4: of, relating to, or concerned with classification; specifically : taxonomic

[ TITLE 17 ] Isolated, spontaneous making of single photocopies by a library in a for-profit organization, without any systematic effort to substitute photocopying for subscriptions or purchases, would be covered by section 108, even though the copies are furnished to the employees of the organization for use in their work. Similarly, for-profit libraries could participate in interlibrary arrangements for exchange of photocopies, as long as the reproduction or distribution was not "systematic." These activities, by themselves, would ordinarily not be considered "for direct or indirect commercial advantage," since the "advantage" referred to in this clause must attach to the immediate commercial motivation behind the reproduction or distribution itself, rather than to the ultimate profit-making motivation behind the enterprise in which the library is located. On the other hand, section 108 would not excuse reproduction or distribution if there were a commercial motive behind the actual making or distributing of the copies, if multiple copies were made or distributed, or if the photocopying activities were "systematic" in the sense that their aim was to substitute for subscriptions or purchases.

<>

Archival Reproduction
[ CD ] Under this exemption, it appears a repository could make photocopies of manuscripts by microfilm or electrostatic process, but could not reproduce the work in "machine-readable" language for storage in an information system.

An issue to be addressed is the status of these works when libraries empty out their archives or library stacks to bring in updated new product or wants to scan the material to microfiche or scan items to put ‘library’ on line. My guess is these are the concerns of libraries and librarians. Recommendation would be to have a uniform document created with/for the ALA, American Library Association, that will be uniform inclusive of libraries in schools of all types (k-college), nursing homes, hospitals or even Occupy Wall Street type libraries. That said, to qualify as a library, all these ‘unofficial’ libraries, many created by ‘Friends of (fill in the blank), to act as a Library will have to perform in accordance with rules for Libraries OR be in violation of Copyright Law. Uniform Code/Handbooks do work, as created in the UK for uniform command for Mounted facilitating any Mounted officer in the UK to be immediately On-Point when responding to a Call For Help anywhere else in the UK. To remind, anyone can call themselves a Library but to operate with Copyright Consideration, a library must be in compliance with the ALA or other such indicated Library/Librarian entity.

Subsection (b) authorizes the reproduction and distribution of a copy or phonorecord of an unpublished work duplicated in facsimile form solely for purposes of preservation and security, or for deposit for research use in another library or archives, if the copy or phonorecord reproduced is currently in the collections of the first library or archives. Only unpublished works could be reproduced under this exemption, but the right would extend to any type of work, including photographs, motion pictures and sound recordings.

<>

Articles and Small Excerpts
[ CD ] The “one article” contribution is not clear if it is “one article” by “one author” or…. There are two copyrights being dealt with when addressing a Copyrighted Collection or Periodical issue. Articles are the property of the Author. The magazine was a collection is the property of the publisher. Both the Author and Publisher profit from their collaboration.

The “copy” cannot become the “property of the User” unless the Author and/or Publisher assign rights to the User. This wont happen unless the User pays the Demand Price. The terminology for the Copy should shift to something more appropriate and correct ie. “limited implied license of the Copy by the User for Private/Scholastic use, a license that dissolves within a defined window ie. 6 hours, 12 hours, TBD.” Tracking copies made in Copy centers such as Staples or Fed Ex is easier in that Credit Cards are needed to make the copy or a purchased Copy card which could facilitate tracking a user. That said, the greater issue is how and from where was the data received. If the data was disseminated by an ISP who abused Safe Harbor, the greater issue again, is the druggie or their dealer- both are wrong. One might be ‘wronger.’

[ TITLE 17 ] Subsection (d) authorizes the reproduction and distribution of a copy of not more than one article or other contribution to a copyrighted collection or periodical issue, or of a copy or phonorecord of a small part of any other copyrighted work. The copy or phonorecord may be made by the library where the user makes his request or by another library pursuant to an interlibrary loan. It is further required that the copy become the property of the user, that the library or archives have no notice that the copy would be used for any purposes other than private study, scholarship or research, and that the library or archives display prominently at the place where reproduction requests are accepted, and includes in its order form, a warning of copyright in accordance with requirements that the Register of Copyrights shall prescribe by regulation.

<>

[ CD ] The Committee was responsible to provide to the Register of Copyrights a ‘new subsection to Section 108, five years from the effective dates of the new Act. Where is the report?

[ TITLE 17 ] In addition, the Committee added a new subsection (i) to section 108 [this section], requiring the Register of Copyrights, five years from the effective date of the new Act and at five-year intervals thereafter, to report to Congress upon "the extent to which this section has achieved the intended statutory balancing of the rights of creators, and the needs of users," and to make appropriate legislative or other recommendations. As noted in connection with section 107, the Committee also amended section 504(c) in a way that would insulate librarians from unwarranted liability for copyright infringement; this amendment is discussed below…

<>

[ CD ] Where is the physical office of the National Commission on New technological Uses of Copyrighted Works that offered to develop the ‘good idea’

[ TITLE 17 ] The National Commission on New Technological Uses of Copyrighted Works (CONTU) offered to provide good offices in helping to develop these guidelines. This offer was accepted and, although the final text of guidelines has not yet been achieved, the Committee has reason to hope that, within the next month, some agreement can be reached on an initial set of guidelines covering practices under section 108(g)(2).

§ 109—Limitations on exclusive rights: Effect of transfer of particular copy or phonorecord

[ CD ] (1) the date of the publication in the Federal Register of the notice of intent filed with the Copyright Office under section 104A(d)(2)(A), or

(2) the date of the receipt of actual notice served under section 104A(d)(2)(B), whichever occurs first.

<>

Insert into here “shall apply to the rental, lease, or lending…” the word license

“The transfer of possession of a lawfully made copy of a computer program by a nonprofit educational institution to another nonprofit educational institution or to faculty, staff, and students does not constitute rental, lease, or lending for direct or indirect commercial purposes under this subsection” is at issue if no steps are taken to vet the verity of the Non profit ie on Guidestar.org or a ‘student’ who does not produce a Student Card or Faculty/staff unable to substantiate they are in fact working on a real project/assignment. There must also be a penalty for sharing ID to avoid being bound by terms of this clause. For example, a student ID should be provided along with a driver’s license when applicable or a Parent license for minors. College libraries are actively used by activists, homeless, etc.The Boston Bombers allege to have found their Pot Bomb online. Did the brothers use a college library to research the Bomb? Did the brothers use the younger brothers college email adress to research on line? Knowing these variables it is best to encourage research that is provided along with steps that facilitate mitigating Unauthorized Use of Copyright.

[ TITLE 17 ] (b)(1)(A) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a), unless authorized by the owners of copyright in the sound recording or the owner of copyright in a computer program (including any tape, disk, or other medium embodying such program), and in the case of a sound recording in the musical works embodied therein, neither the owner of a particular phonorecord nor any person in possession of a particular copy of a computer program (including any tape, disk, or other medium embodying such program), may, for the purposes of direct or indirect commercial advantage, dispose of, or authorize the disposal of, the possession of that phonorecord or computer program (including any tape, disk, or other medium embodying such program) by rental, lease, or lending, or by any other act or practice in the nature of rental, lease, or lending. Nothing in the preceding sentence shall apply to the rental, lease, or lending of a phonorecord for nonprofit purposes by a nonprofit library or nonprofit educational institution. The transfer of possession of a lawfully made copy of a computer program by a nonprofit educational institution to another nonprofit educational institution or to faculty, staff, and students does not constitute rental, lease, or lending for direct or indirect commercial purposes under this subsection.

<>

[ CD ] To be correct, anyone who is an infringer of Copyright is in violation of Federal Law and possibly liable for Wire Fraud and other charges. It is that plain and simple.

[ TITLE 17 ] (4) Any person who distributes a phonorecord or a copy of a computer program (including any tape, disk, or other medium embodying such program) in violation of paragraph (1) is an infringer of copyright under section 501 of this title and is subject to the remedies set forth in sections 502, 503, 504, and 505. Such violation shall not be a criminal offense under section 506 or cause such person to be subject to the criminal penalties set forth in section 2319 of title 18.

<>

[ CD ] The Register of Copyrights/USPTO are just that, the Register of Copyrights and the USPTO. Laws that are/may be violated fall under the overview of Law Enforcement- local, national, civil, Federal. The two should be working together, doing what each does best. The Copyright Office/USPTO is, apparently, the only profitable Government agency, appearing to have hired on more staff- attornies. In that law enforcement skilled in Cybercrime are being released due to lack of funding/sequester, the logical thought is to bring these men and women over to the Copyright Office/USPTO where the Copyright Crime Division will focus on Copyright theft, Identity Theft and Commerce theft, the fall out of Intellectual Property Theft.

[ TITLE 17 ] Amended subparagraph (b)(2)(B) by substituting "Register of Copyrights considers appropriate" for "Register of Copyright considers appropriate". [§ 12(a)(5)]

<>

[ CD ] There has been a shift in Europe and in America for Intellectual Property Owners to request a percentage of the profit of their IP as it ecrues in value. Conversely, one might make the argument that if their IP loses value, they might be requested to be liable for the loss in value unless the item is sold as Caveat Empor. What is not clear in transfer of items is the status of rights to profit ie. Sothebys, Antique Roadshow, or the artisans who repurpose ie. Golden Book children’s books or Nancy Drew books into purses, placemats or record album covers into placemats, Christmas items, purses and/or wall art without understanding the reach of Copyright prevents this, at the same time stifling a brilliant idea that can still happen BUT without using the Good Name created by the Beatles, Golden Books and/or Carolyn Keene along with her Nancy Drew series publisher. It is important to state, the design relationship is incestuous in that mass marketers feed off design inspiration they see at craft fairs and craft persons feed off design inspiration they see in the mass marketers, mom & pops and high end stores. The difference to be aware of TO COPY EXACTLY OR USE AS PUT INTO THE MARKET PLACE is Copyright Infringement, in discussion here.

[ TITLE 17 ] Section 109(a) restates and confirms the principle that, where the copyright owner has transferred ownership of a particular copy or phonorecord of a work, the person to whom the copy or phonorecord is transferred is entitled to dispose of it by sale, rental, or any other means. Under this principle, which has been established by the court decisions and section 27 of the present law [section 27 of former title 17], the copyright owner's exclusive right of public distribution would have no effect upon anyone who owns "a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under this title" and who wishes to transfer it to someone else or to destroy it.

<>

[ CD ] “Under section 202” refer above.

It is important to be mindful that Libraries/Institutions of Education do dispose of “authorized copy of a book” at yard sales, book sales and fundraisers more often conducted by “Friends Of (Entity).” The “Friends Of (Entity)” must be bound to the terms of the Library/Institution of Education AND the “Friends Of (Entity)” must be a legal entity registered in compliance with local and Federal law otherwise they will knowingly be putting the Library/Institution of Education at risk of loss of access to copyrighted material the Library/Institution of Education want access too. In these days of the Internet, there are countless free share books the Library/Institution of Education can put onto their shelf real estate just not the hot sellers they want like Fifty Shares of Gray or Oprah’s newest or best Book of the Month Club recommendation.

[ TITLE 17 ] Thus, for example, the outright sale of an authorized copy of a book frees it from any copyright control over its resale price or other conditions of its future disposition. A library that has acquired ownership of a copy is entitled to lend it under any conditions it chooses to impose. This does not mean that conditions on future disposition of copies or phonorecords, imposed by a contract between their buyer and seller, would be unenforceable between the parties as a breach of contract, but it does mean that they could not be enforced by an action for infringement of copyright. Under section 202 however, the owner of the physical copy or phonorecord cannot reproduce or perform the copyrighted work publicly without the copyright owner's consent.

<>

[ CD ].."lawfully made under this title," though not necessarily with the copyright owner's authorization” is an oxymoron. It is either lawful or it isn’t lawful. It cant be both lawful and an Unauthorized Use of Copyright in that the owner of the Copyright, in an agreement, spells out the terms of disposition of Remainder Stock and steps taken for Unauthorized Use compliance.

[ TITLE 17 ] To come within the scope of section 109(a), a copy or phonorecord must have been "lawfully made under this title," though not necessarily with the copyright owner's authorization. For example, any resale of an illegally "pirated" phonorecord would be an infringement, but the disposition of a phonorecord legally made under the compulsory licensing provisions of section 115 would not.

<>

Effect on Display of Copy
[ CD ] Expand to include the words “samples”, “sketches”, “thumbnails”, “working models” in “…including the original or prototype copy in..”

Adressing a painter selling “the only copy of an original work..” If it is an original, there is no copy. To avoid confusion and legal wrangling, mitigate confusing text and potential for conflict hence text should read “a painter sold an original work of art without restrictions…” The slippery slope here is DID the artist know the rules of business or not and if not, as an adult whose responsibility it is to know the rules of his business, can the artist claim ignorance of the law. NO. BUT a        co-operative relationship between arts chools and law schools as described in the Small Claims Court Comment I filed, will be a step towards mitigating this occurring. That said, IF the artwork had not escalated in value, would the artist have asked for a piece of the action or credit for being the Author of the work? Another Point Of View, POV, to consider asks if a designer can restrain a paparrazi from marketing their IP, clothes, that are on a celebr, and/or restrain the photograph of the celeb being published in a magazine or claim payment from the Paparazzi profiting publications and websites using the image of the designer’s clothes on the celebrity? Or does the Author use that public showing in a gallery, shop window, as PR. Projector and Television are different categories to adress.

[ TITLE 17 ] Subsection (b) of section 109 deals with the scope of the copyright owner's exclusive right to control the public display of a particular "copy" of a work (including the original or prototype copy in which the work was first fixed). Assuming, for example, that a painter has sold the only copy of an original work of art without restrictions, would it be possible for him to restrain the new owner from displaying it publicly in galleries, shop windows, on a projector, or on television?

<>

[ CD ] This needs clarification as to if the artwork is an original artwork “a copy of a work” as defined by in a collectible, memorabilia or an edition- limited or otherwise. Putting an Artwork on public display is not a violation of Copyright or the Copyright Owner’s Rights. A Copyright Owner’s Rights would not be violated if they transferred Copyright Ownership to the Buyer. If the Copyright Owner did not transfer rights to the Buyer, the Copyright belongs to the Copyright Owner. If the Copyright Owner did not provide nor request follow up after the sale or Transfer there is little expectation other than the Buyer’s payment provided to the Copyright Owner what they sought- money. A model to possibly follow here might be the Adoption agreements used for Horse, Cat and Dog adoption which come with requirements/restrictions as to sale or transfer of the Adopted animal. Animals are considered Property under the law. These are good models to follow for precedence.

[ TITLE 17 ] Section 109(b) adopts the general principle that the lawful owner of a copy of a work should be able to put his copy on public display without the consent of the copyright owner. As in cases arising under section 109(a), this does not mean that contractual restrictions on display between a buyer and seller would be unenforceable as a matter of contract law.

<>

[ CD ] This clause and/or definition of “public projection of a single image” may no longer be viable in that in the Technological World people gather online with online business meetings, Chat, online Meetups, Google+ Hangouts www.google.com/+/learnmore/hangouts/‎ Microsoft had under development a cell phone that could reverse then project the image/text on to another surface. Screen grabs can be created on computers from which the image can then be printed/downloaded and copied without Authorization, without compensation to the Copyright Owner. Television is a public projection of single images ie. used in news reports or strung together. The cost to the Arts community can be immediate and incalculable. A noteworthy example of ‘Screen Image Theft’ is the immediate Piracy/theft of the late Princess Diana’s wedding dress within seconds of her dress broadcast on TV. The definition of Public Place is also being challenged by proponents of Google Glass. The cluster of “photographic slide, negative, or transparency” must be updated to include digital cards, and emerging technological advances upon which images are gathered ie thumbdrives

[ TITLE 17 ] The exclusive right of public display granted by section 106(5) would not apply where the owner of a copy wishes to show it directly to the public, as in a gallery or display case, or indirectly, as through an opaque projector. Where the copy itself is intended for projection, as in the case of a photographic slide, negative, or transparency, the public projection of a single image would be permitted as long as the viewers are "present at the place where the copy is located."

<>

[ CD ] Update to include Internet, hologram “if the image were transmitted by any method (by closed or open circuit television..”

[ CD ] Update "the place where the copy is located" to include online, flashdrive, digital cards, mobiles, etc

[ CD ] Update “members of the public located elsewhere” to include Internet, etc.

[ TITLE 17 ] On the other hand, section 109(b) takes account of the potentialities of the new communications media, notably television, cable and optical transmission devices, and information storage and retrieval devices, for replacing printed copies with visual images. First of all, the public display of an image of a copyrighted work would not be exempted from copyright control if the copy from which the image was derived were outside the presence of the viewers. In other words, the display of a visual image of a copyrighted work would be an infringement if the image were transmitted by any method (by closed or open circuit television, for example, or by a computer system) from one place to members of the public located elsewhere. The concept of "the place where the copy is located" is generally intended to refer to a situation in which the viewers are present in the same physical surroundings as the copy, even though they cannot see the copy directly.

<>

Burden of Proof in Infringement Actions
[ CD ] Without proof of license or an agreement to use/possess then “allegedly infringing copies in the defendant's possession were not lawfully made or acquired” is Unauthorized Use and Theft

[ TITLE 17 ] During the course of its deliberations on this section, the Committee's attention was directed to a recent court decision holding that the plaintiff in an infringement action had the burden of establishing that the allegedly infringing copies in the defendant's possession were not lawfully made or acquired under section 27 of the present law [section 27 of former title 17]. …

§ 110—Limitations on exclusive rights: Exemption of certain performances and displays

No Profit Motive
[ CD ] Everything has a commercial advantage- a gift, a token, a portfolio piece, ownership, displaying talents in order to gain employment/kudos/recognition

[ TITLE 17 ] In addition to the other conditions specified by the clause, the performance must be "without any purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage." …

<>

No Payment for Performance
[ CD ] Everything has a commercial advantage- a gift, a token, a portfolio piece, ownership, displaying talents in order to gain employment/kudos/recognition. It becomes a portfolio piece or showcase

[ TITLE 17 ] An important condition for this exemption is that the performance be given "without payment of any fee or other compensation for the performance to any of its performers, promoters, or organizers." The basic purpose of this requirement is to prevent the free use of copyrighted material under the guise of charity where fees or percentages are paid to performers, promoters, producers, and the like…."payment of any fee or other compensation."

<>

Transmission to Handicapped Audiences [ CD ] Should clarify communities of handicap included or intended to benefit ie Emotional, Visual and/or Aural Handicap. Without clarification, open to Abuse

§ 111—Limitations on exclusive rights: Secondary transmissions

(b) Secondary Transmission of Primary Transmission to Controlled Group
Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a) and (c), the secondary transmission to the public of a performance or display of a work reading from someones text, showing a photo or piece of art) …

(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of clause (1) of this subsection and subject to the provisions of subsection (e) of this section, the secondary transmission to the public by a cable system of a performance or display of a work

<>

(d) Statutory License for Secondary Transmissions by Cable Systems
[ CD ] The Statutory License for Secondary Transmissions is limited to Cable Systems The Statutory License for Secondary Transmissions should be expanded to include mobile, Internet, fiber, sites like Hulu, Youtube and emerging innovation yet to be

[ TITLE 17 ] (C) During the pendency of any proceeding under this subsection, the Copyright Royalty Judges shall have the discretion to authorize the Librarian of Congress to proceed to distribute any amounts that are not in controversy.

<>

[ CD ] The term “videotape”, and each of its variant forms” and “films”, “B-roll” (news terminology) does not adress current and emerging technologies ie video transferred on digital cards ie Sandisk cards www.sandisk.com

[ TITLE 17 ] (4) As used in this subsection, the term “videotape”, and each of its variant forms, means the reproduction of the images and sounds of a program or programs broadcast by a television broadcast station licensed by the Federal Communications Commission, regardless of the nature of the material objects, such as tapes or films, in which the reproduction is embodied.

<>

Copyright Royalty and Distribution Reform Act of 2004 Pub. L. No. 108-419, Nov. 30, 2004, 118 Stat. 2341

[ CD ] Amended paragraph (d)(2) by substituting "the Copyright Royalty Judges" for "a copyright arbitration royalty panel", with effect from May 30, 2005. [§ 5(a)(1)]

<>

[ CD ] Amended subparagraphs (d)(4)(A) and (C) by correcting TYPO “substuting” Copyright Royalty Judges" for "Librarian of Congress", with effect from May 30, 2005. [§ 5(a)(2)(A), (C)]

<>

[ CD ] The jurisdiction of oversight by “Copyright Royalty Judges” addressed in Title 17 is limited to MUSICAL WORK, SOUND RECORDING & CABLE SYSTEMS and not to other industries hence “Copyright Royalty Judges” should be renamed and addressed as MUSICAL WORK, SOUND RECORDING & CABLE SYSTEMS COPYRIGHT ROYALTY JUDGES

<>

[ CD ] The COPYRIGHT Royalty Commission should be renamed the “MUSICAL WORK, SOUND RECORDING & CABLE SYSTEMS COPYRIGHT Royalty Commission”

[ TITLE 17 ] Each year they are distributed by MUSICAL WORK, SOUND RECORDING & CABLE SYSTEMS COPYRIGHT Royalty Commission to those copyright owners who may validly claim that their works were the subject of distant non-network retransmissions by cable systems.

<>

Analysis of Provisions
[ CD ] The operative terms should be clarified to read as “PRIMARY CABLE SYSTEMS TRANSMISSION” and “SECONDARY CABLE SYSTEMS TRANSMISSION”

[ TITLE 17 ] Throughout section 111, the operative terms are "primary transmission" and "secondary transmission."

<>

General Exemptions
[ CD ] While this segment of Title 17 focuses on Cable Systems the world has shifted to Online transmission models, Fiber such as Google Fiber and other methods of transmission on which all arts Copyright Owners are to be protected from Unauthorized Use and over which the MUSICAL WORK, SOUND RECORDING & CABLE SYSTEMS COPYRIGHT ROYALTY JUDGES should have oversight

[ TITLE 17 ] Certain secondary CABLE SYSTEMS transmissions …"no direct charge is made to see or hear the secondary CABLE SYSTEMS transmission."

<>

Copyright Royalty Distribution (Adressed above)

[ TITLE 17 ] If the CABLE SYSTEMS COPYRIGHT ROYALTY Commission ….

<>

Primary and Secondary Transmissions
[ CD ] The term ‘Primary Systems’ albeit in the Cable sector of the Copyright Law can be abused. Simpler to state completely leaving no room for misinterpretation.

The definitions of "primary CABLE SYSTEMS …

<>

Cable System
[ CD ] Congress is playing catchup with Title 17 legislation and technology. Technological advances impacting Title 17 are presented to startups and Hackathons and partners and investors long before the innovation hits the street then hitting Congress in the side of the head, leaving Legislators wondering what just happened. There are ways to get ahead of the 8 ball, so to speak.

  “A cable television headend is a master facility for receiving television signals for processing and distribution over a cable television system.” [ Wikipedia ] Technology for transmitting Intellectual Property has moved past this definition. Technologies including Fiber, online, hologram, etc should be included in the verbage. Cablesystems are not the only threat to Copyright Owners these days. Copyright Owners Rights to their Intellectual Property is threatened by online transmissions, and other emerging technologies. The Unauthorized Use of IP goes undetected until it is discovered by chance or by going viral.

[ TITLE 17 ] The definition of a "cable system" …. Further, the definition provides that, in determining the applicable royalty fee and system classification under subsection (d)(2)(B), (C), or (D) cable systems in contiguous communities under common ownership or control or operating from one headend are considered as one system.

<>

Local Service Area of a Primary Transmitter
[ CD ] Reality is Cable Systems are no longer the current threat to Intellectual Property owners, it once was. The active aggressive threat to Copyright Owners is the Internet and emerging technologies, Legislators are struggling to legislate as the news tends to hit Congress after the bad deed has been done or discovered. A second threat to Intellectual Property is the anonymity Online allows to abusers who use ISPs to travel globally confusing trackers. For example, State Department utilizes hackers who set up configurations that travel through ISPs under the names of persons who contributed access to their ISP’s or persons who, by entering a site, unknowingly allowed access to the person’s ISP which is then used by individual(s) in another sector of the world ie activists, freedom fighters etc. No one really knows who anyone, the ISP person is or where they are based http://www.livestream.com/techstate

http://www.livestream.com/techstate/video?clipId=pla_6120b400-65f1-42aa-83f2-ce0bc3faf798&utm_source=lslibrary&utm_medium=ui-thumb

(keynote speech by Andrew McLaughlin ) http://www.livestream.com/techstate/video?clipId=pla_2af6bd26-1ace-451b-bb9a-d130da2fbd4b&utm_source=lslibrary&utm_medium=ui-thumb

[ TITLE 17 ] The definition of "local service area of a primary CABLE SYSTEMS transmitter" …payments provided in the legislation, should only be made by an amendment to the statute.

<>

[ CD ] The cluster of included “stations” is outdated, also, in that stations along with online entities, mobile providers, users, etc. are the greatest violators of Unauthorized Use of Copyright

[ TITLE 17 ] …Network Station/ Independent Station/ Noncommercial Educational Station…

<>

§ 112—Limitations on exclusive rights: Ephemeral recordings

§ 113—Scope of exclusive rights in pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works

§ 114 —Scope of exclusive rights in sound recordings
Webcaster Settlement Act of 2008 Consider striking ``Librarian of Congress of July 8, 2002´´ and inserting ``Copyright Royalty Judges of May 1, 2007´´; and rename to MUSICAL WORK, SOUND RECORDING & CABLE SYSTEMS COPYRIGHT ROYALTY JUDGES of MAY 1 2007

§ 115—Scope of exclusive rights in nondramatic musical works: Compulsory license for making and distributing phonorecords

§ 116—Negotiated licenses for public performances by means of coin operated phonorecord players

§ 117—Limitations on exclusive rights: Computer programs

§ 118—Scope of exclusive rights: Use of certain works in connection with noncommercial broadcasting
[ CD ] There is no such thing as non commercial broadcasting. Everything has the potential for Commerce. Someone is always making money, somewhere

Reference.com definition of noncommercial
1. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of commerce
2. engaged in commerce.
3. prepared, done, or acting with sole or chief emphasis on salability, profit, or success: a commercial product; His attitude toward the theater is very commercial.
4. able to yield or make a profit: We decided that the small oil well was not commercial.
5. suitable or fit for a wide, popular market: Communications satellites are gradually finding a commercial use.

<>

[ CD ] At question is why NPR, VOA, and the Military/Pentagon channel are excluded from the specification of PBS alongside Cable System.

The Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) is a non-profit, public broadcasting television collective ownership network headquartered in Arlington VA, USA, with 354 member television stations.

Sesame Street (PBS) is commercial. Sesame Street makes a profit. Sesame Street is a multi-million dollar international brand shown in over 140 countries. Sesame Street’s 2009 990 Tax forms shows it brought in over $140 million in revenues in 2009. Sesame Street is a "a multiple-media institution" with over 68% of Sesame Street's revenue came from licenses and products such as toys and clothing bringing in between $15 million and $17 million per year in licensing and merchandising fees, split between the Sesame Workshop and Henson Associates. Jim Henson owns the trademark to the Sesame Street characters. Sesame Street has since expanded in to the Grammy Zone along with feature films [ Wikipedia ]

<>

Secondary Transmissions by Satellite Carriers
The difference between Commercial TV and noncommercial TV is commercials. PBS runs commercials marketed as Sponsor Messages. NDI, National Datacast, datacasting via member stations, helps PBS earn revenue. PBS member stations pay fees for the shows acquired and distributed by the national organization. PBS news, documentary, or entertainment programming is created by other parties including individual member stations. In some ways, PBSs method of operation is an aggregation model adopted by the Internet utilizing OPIP, Other Parties Intellectual Property to provide content then profit from while finishing out the year at a non profit goose egg.

[ TITLE 17 ] (1) SUPERSTATIONS AND PBS SATELLITE FEED.—…. In the case of the Public Broadcasting Service satellite feed, the statutory license shall be effective until January 1, 2002.

§ 119—Limitations on exclusive rights: Secondary transmissions of superstations and network stations for private home viewing

§ 120--Scope of exclusive rights in architectural works

[ CD ] The presumption here is the architectural work was done Work-For-Hire. This detail will be spelled out in the Terms of Contract.

[ TITLE 17 ] (b) Alterations to and Destruction of Buildings.

Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106(2), the owners of a building embodying an architectural work may, without the consent of the author or copyright owner of the architectural work, make or authorize the making of alterations to such building, and destroy or authorize the destruction of such building.

§121 Limitations on exclusive rights: Reproduction for blind or other people with disabilities

[ CD ] The statement of Disability is too broad an interpretation that can lead to abuse of Intent. It is easy enough to state the Disability and briefly terms of…

[ TITLE 17 ] (b)(1) Copies or phonorecords to which this section applies shall--

(A) not be reproduced or distributed in a format other than a specialized format exclusively for use by blind or other persons with disabilities;

<>

WIPO TREATY Sec. 601. Short Title.
[ CD ] The reports were due in 2004. Would like to read. Where can they be located?

[ TITLE 17 ] This title may be cited as the ``Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990´´.

<>

Sec. 602. Work of Visual Art Defined.
[ CD ] The exemptions from the definition of “a work of visual art” should be included because everything can be made into something that is commercial and can be duplicated and or licensed. A former colleague licensed DNA…

[ TITLE 17 ] `A work of visual art does not include--
(A)
(i) any poster, map, globe, chart, technical drawing, diagram, model, applied art, motion picture or other audiovisual work, book, magazine, newspaper, periodical, data base, electronic information service, electronic publication, or similar publication; -

<>

[ CD ] Merchandising items or “advertising, promotional, descriptive, covering, or packaging material or container” are created by designers, do develop followings and are licensed…

[ TITLE 17 ] (ii) any merchandising item or advertising, promotional, descriptive, covering, or packaging material or container;

<>

The use of one’s own name should be protected. Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest etc have resorted to identifying a celeb as THE REAL (name of the celeb). Sarah Palin, recognizing her family’s vulnerability to Trademark poachers, trademarked her family’s names, as did Beyonce and JZ with their baby’s name as is my name and as is your name will be discovered when you search your name on line at sites like www.spokeo.com Spokeo.com appears to have accessed my photos with databot searches and/or AI, artificial intelligence, allowing spokeo.com to cluster my data on their site. Spokeo.com has gone further and Watermarked my photos with THEIR “Spokeo.com” watermark giving the impression that Spokeo has legal access to use of my images [ Attachment ]

[ TITLE 17 ] (iii) any portion or part of any item described in clause (i) or (ii);

(B) any work made for hire; or

(C) any work not subject to copyright protection under this title.´´.

<>

[ CD ] Should read ALL authors. All authors are entitled to their rights afforded under Intellectual Property authorship

[ TITLE 17 ] Sec. 106A. Rights of Certain Authors to Attribution and Define attribution
(A) to claim authorship of that work, and
(B) to prevent the use of his or her name as the author of any work of visual art which he or she did not create;
(2) shall have the right to prevent the use of his or her name as the author of the work of visual art in the event of a distortion, mutilation, or other modification of the work which would be prejudicial to his or her honor or reputation; and

<>

[ CD ] The use of one’s own name should be protected. Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest etc have resorted to identifying a celeb as THE REAL (name of the celeb). Sarah Palin, recognizing her family’s vulnerability to Trademark poachers, trademarked her family’s names, as did Beyonce and JZ with their baby’s name as is my name and as is your name will be discovered when you search your name on line at sites like www.spokeo.com

[ TITLE 17 ] (3) subject to the limitations set forth in section 113(d), shall have the right--

(A) to prevent any intentional distortion, mutilation, or other modification of that work which would be prejudicial to his or her honor or reputation, and any intentional distortion, mutilation, or modification of that work is a violation of that right, and

<>

[ CD ] The use of one’s own name should be protected. Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest etc have resorted to identifying a celeb as THE REAL (name of the celeb). Sarah Palin, recognizing her family’s vulnerability to Trademark poachers, trademarked her family’s names, as did Beyonce and JZ with their baby’s name as is my name and as is your name will be discovered when you search your name on line at sites like www.spokeo.com

[ TITLE 17 ] (B) to prevent any destruction of a work of recognized stature, and any intentional or grossly negligent destruction of that work is a violation of that right.

<>

[ CD ] A Transfer of Ownership can be a waiver of rights when and if the Ownership is relinquished in the Transfer of Ownership agreement or on the Bill of Sale

(e) TRANSFER AND WAIVER.--

(2) Ownership of the rights…Transfer of ownership of any copy of a work of visual art, or of a copyright or any exclusive right under a copyright, shall not constitute a waiver of the rights conferred by subsection (a) with respect to a work of visual art shall not constitute a transfer of ownership of any copy of that work, or of ownership of a copyright or of any exclusive right under a copyright in that work.´´.

<>

Sec. 604. Removal of Works of Visual Art from Buildings [ CD ] If the work was created as a Work-For-Hire with the transfer of all rights to the Hirer, then the work no longer belongs to the artist and its new owner can do whatever they want with the visual art. The Register of Copyright might benefit from commissioning simple, sample layman English agreements the Register can offer to the Public to use to mitigate disagreements Gallery Like- terms set out in agreement <>

[ CD ] This appears to be a Civil Matter which may set precedence for adjudication of Title 17 Unauthorized Use of Copyright disputes to be addressed in the Civil and/or Criminal courts, out of the Federal court

[ TITLE 17 ] Section 113 of title 17, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following:…
(B) the owner did provide such notice in writing and the person so notified failed, within 90 days after receiving such notice, either to remove the work or to pay for its removal.

<>

[ CD ] While this appears as a nice idea, it fails from the beginning, in that people do not tend to keep up these obligations of update and/or ‘life happens’

[ TITLE 17 ] (3) The Register of Copyrights shall establish a system of records whereby any author of a work of visual art that has been incorporated in or made part of a building, may record his or her identity and address with the Copyright Office. The Register shall also establish procedures under which any such author may update the information so recorded, and procedures under which owners of buildings may record with the Copyright Office evidence of their efforts to comply with this subsection.´´.

<>

Sec. 608. Studies by Copyright Office.
[ CD ] The last revision of Copyright Ownership term, removed a Creator’s Right to their Property to life plus 70. How is an Author covered if they become famous after death and with no heirs?
There is no conversation in Title 17 of Copyleft Agreements. Copyleft is Copyleft being pitched as a form of licensing used to maintain as free copyright conditions for works such as computer software, documents and art a program, requiring all modified and extended versions of the program be free, too.

[ TITLE 17 ] (a) STUDY ON WAIVER OF RIGHTS PROVISION.— called a license agreement.

<>

[ CD ] Where are the reports? I would like to read them.

[ TITLE 17 ] (1) STUDY.--
The Register of Copyrights shall conduct a study on the extent to which rights conferred by subsection (a) of section 106A of title 17, United States Code, have been waived under subsection (e)(1) of such section….

(2) REPORT TO CONGRESS.--
Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Register of Copyrights shall submit to the Congress a report on the progress of the study conducted under paragraph (1). Not later than 5 years after such date of enactment, the Register of Copyrights shall submit to the Congress a final report on the results of the study conducted under paragraph (1), and any recommendations that the Register may have as a result of the study.

<>

[ CD ] The reality is to license or not to license is a decision that should be left up to the individual artist in that each artist has different needs and ambitions. Some artists prefer their money up front without having to worry about the paperwork, upkeep, maintenance, billing. Other artists want to own their potentials. Some are better business persons than others. Agents, if brought on board to manage the policing and collections of royalties take a percentage artists would rather not lose, preferring guaranteed cash to speculative royalty income. This is an adult decision the artist should be encourage to consider to make or not make. Every moment spent policing income is a moment not spent doing one’s art.

[ TITLE 17 ] (2) GROUPS TO BE CONSULTED.--
….The Register of Copyrights, in consultation with the Chair of the National Endowment for the Arts, shall conduct a study on the feasibility of implementing--

(A) a requirement that, after the first sale of a work of art, a royalty on any resale of the work, consisting of a percentage of the price, be paid to the author of the work; and

(B) other possible requirements that would achieve the objective of allowing an author of a work of art to share monetarily in the enhanced value of that work.

<>

[ CD ] I would like to read the “Report To Congress”

[ TITLE 17 ] The study under paragraph (1) shall be conducted in consultation with other appropriate departments and agencies of the United States, foreign governments, and groups involved in the creation, exhibition, dissemination, and preservation of works of art, including artists, art dealers, collectors of fine art, and curators of art museums.

(3) REPORT TO CONGRESS.--

Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Register of Copyrights shall submit to the Congress a report containing the results of the study conducted under this subsection.

<>

[ CD ] Work Made For Hire and Copyright Corrections Act of 2000

<>

§ 801. Copyright Royalty Judges; appointment and functions
(b) Functions. — Subject to the provisions of this chapter, the functions of the Copyright Royalty Judges shall be as follows:

<>

[ CD ] Cable systems has been addressed earlier as there are other technologies to be concerned as platforms over, through and on which IP Copyright Ownership Rights are abused

[ TITLE 17 ] (1) …

(A) To maximize the availability of creative works OFFERED to the public over Cable Systems

<>

[ CD ] This right and entitlement offered in the Cable Systems area of Title 17 should be offered to the 2D IP Creator

[ TITLE 17 ] (B) To afford the copyright owner a fair return for his or her creative work and the copyright user a fair income under existing economic conditions.

<>

[ CD ] This right and entitlement offered in the Cable Systems area of Title 17 should be offered to the 2D IP Creator

(C) To reflect the relative roles of the copyright owner and the copyright user in the product made available to the public with respect to relative creative contribution, technological contribution, capital investment, cost, risk, and contribution to the opening of new markets for creative expression and media for their communication.

<>

[ CD ] This right and entitlement offered in the Cable Systems area of Title 17 should be offered to the 2D IP Creator

[ TITLE 17 ] (D) To minimize any disruptive impact on the structure of the industries involved and on generally prevailing industry practices.

<>

[ CD ] It is unclear to cable subscribers their cable fee includes royalty rates moreso that the royalty rates are inclusive of shows the Cable Subscriber may not want to get but must pay for to get services, albeit it a higher rate to, sales pitch is, to get a lower rate ie. Comcast Triple Play- Internet, TV, Phone. A Cable Subscriber might only watch 2-5 of the hundreds of shows Cable provides

[ TITLE 17 ] (ii) changes in the average rates charged cable subscribers for the basic service of providing secondary transmissions to maintain the real constant dollar level of the royalty fee per subscriber which existed as of the date of October 19, 1976…

<>

Chapter 8 . Notes
[ CD ] It is more correct if it is called the MUSICAL WORK, SOUND RECORDING & CABLE SYSTEMS COPYRIGHT ROYALTY JUDGES PROGRAM TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS ACT and more correct if called the MUSICAL WORK, SOUND RECORDING & CABLE SYSTEMS COPYRIGHT ROYALTY and DISTRIBUTION REFORM ACT

[ TITLE 17 ] The Copyright Royalty and Distribution Reform Act of 2004 …

In 2006, the Copyright Royalty Judges Program Technical Corrections Act amended chapter 8 throughout. Pub. L. No. 109-303, 120 Stat. 1478. Section 6 of that Act states, “Except as provided under subsection (b), this Act and the amendments made by this Act shall be effective as if included in the Copyright Royalty and Distribution Reform Act of 2004.” Id. at 1483.

<>

[ CD ] The DCMA Safe Harbor protects the ISP/Internet Service Provider from Users’ Copyright Abuses and Unauthorized Use of Copyright. The DCMA Safe Harbor does not protect the ISP/Internet Service Provider (BING IMAGES, GOOGLE IMAGES, AOL/YAHOO, BAIDU, etc) from THEIR Copyright Abuses and Unauthorized Use of Copyright. The ISP/Internet Service Provider is supposed to exercise ‘Due Diligence’ - a certain Standard of Care    <> DCMA/SAFE HARBOR Title II: Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act DMCA Title II, the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act ("OCILLA"), creates a safe harbor for online service providers (OSPs, including ISPs) against copyright infringement liability, provided they meet specific requirements. OSPs must adhere to and qualify for certain prescribed safe harbor guidelines and promptly block access to alleged infringing material (or remove such material from their systems) when they receive notification of an infringement claim from a copyright holder or the copyright holder's agent. OCILLA also includes a counternotification provision that offers OSPs a safe harbor from liability to their users when users claim that the material in question is not, in fact, infringing. OCILLA also facilitates issuing of subpoenas against OSPs to provide their users' identity.

<>

DEFINITION: Safe harbor (law)From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia [ Wikipedia ] A safe harbor is a provision of a statute or a regulation that reduces or eliminates a party's liability under the law, on the condition that the party performed its actions in good faith or in compliance with defined standards. Legislators may include safe-harbor provisions to protect legitimate or excusable violations, or to incentivize the adoption of desirable practices.

<>

[ DMCA ] The Digital Millennium Copyright Act has notable safe-harbor provisions which protect Internet service providers from the consequences of their users' actions …. The US Patent and Trademark Briefing on ISP Liability states that in order to be eligible for safe harbor the ISP must have adopted and reasonably implemented a policy that provides for the termination in appropriate circumstances of subscribers and account holders of the service provider’s system or network who are repeat infringers.

<>

[ CD ] DCMA Safe Harbor does not absolve ISP/Service Providers who infringe on Users Intellectual Property Rights and Copyrights by aggregating through the IPS Copyright Owner/Users’ data, images, copying images for example on Google Goggle….

[ Source: CHILLING EFFECTS ] Question: What are the DMCA Safe Harbor Provisions?Answer: In 1998, Congress passed the On-Line Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act (OCILLA) in an effort to protect service providers on the Internet from liability for the activities of its users. Codified as section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), this new law exempts on-line service providers that meet the criteria set forth in the safe harbor provisions from claims of copyright infringement made against them that result from the conduct of their customers. These safe harbor provisions are designed to shelter service providers from the infringing activities of their customers. If a service provider qualifies for the safe harbor exemption, only the individual infringing customer are liable for monetary damages; the service provider's network through which they engaged in the alleged activities is not liable.

<>

[ CD ] GOOGLE, BING, YAHOO, AOL, BAIDU are just a few of the ISPs/Search Engines/Service Providers global

Question: What defines a service provider under Section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)?
Answer: A service provider is defined as "an entity offering transmission, routing, or providing connections for digital online communications, between or among points specified by a user, of material of the user's choosing, without modification to the content of the material as sent or received" …

<>

[ CD ] The ISPs/Search Engines are aware of the Copyright violations occurring in their IMAGE GALLERY(IES)

Question: What does a service provider have to do in order to qualify for safe harbor protection? Answer: In addition to informing its customers of its policies (discussed above), a service provider must follow the proper notice and takedown procedures (discussed above) and also meet several other requirements in order to qualify for exemption under the safe harbor provisions...Finally, the service provider must not have knowledge that the material or activity is infringing or of the fact that the infringing material exists on its network. [512(c)(1)(A)], [512(d)(1)(A)]. If it does discover such material before being contacted by the copyright owners, it is instructed to remove, or disable access to, the material itself. [512(c)(1)(A)(iii)], [512(d)(1)(C)]. The service provider must not gain any financial benefit that is attributable to the infringing material. [512(c)(1)(B)], [512(d)(2)].

Question: What are the criteria a service provider must satisfy in order to qualify for safe harbor protection under Subsection 512(a) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act? Answer: Subsection 512(a) provides a safe harbor for service providers in regard to communications that do not reside on the service provider

<>

Subsection 512(a) provides a safe harbor for service providers in regard to communications that do not reside on the service provider

[ CD ] The Public is now aware their Internet Communications reside on the service provider where the Users Intellectual Property can be hacked, stolen or secured by law enforcement

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2010/03/google-keeps-your-data-to-learn-from-good-guys-fight-off-bad-guys/ by Nate Anderson - Mar 8 2010, 9:20am EDT

Google logs an astonishing amount of data, including the search logs from its flagship product. It keeps this data indefinitely, so searching for a combination of yourwife'sname and youraddress and "rat poison in her cereal" is not a particularly smart idea (though search users do this sort of thing anyway).

But the company does "anonymize" this data eventually. The last octet of the IP address is wiped after nine months, which means there are 254 possibilities for the IP address in question (.0 and .255 are reserved addresses). After 18 months, Google anonymizes the unique cookie data stored in these logs.

This isn't especially ambitious; Europe's data protection supervisors have called for IP anonymization after six months and competing search engines like Bing do just that (and Bing removes the entire IP address, not just the last octet). Yahoo scrubs its data after 90 days.

<>

FIGHT THEFT OF COPYRIGHTS
<>
SUPPORT

____________
LEGISLATORS
WHO
GET IT

POLITICAL ROCKSTARS
AGAINST
IP & ID ABUSE BY
TECHNOLOGY

_________________
WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMAN
____________________

___________________
Capitol Hill Switchboard
(202) 224 3121 _____________________

WRITE YOUR
SENATOR
___________________

__________________
KNOW YOUR CONGRESSMAN OR
SENATOR
?
SEARCH BY ZIPCODE
__________________

Create
The 2D ARTS IP
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
PROTECTION
ACT
FOR
TREASURED
HEIRLOOM
ARTS
LEGACY
INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY
PROTECTION
SIGN THE PETITION

______________

__________________
TELL HERE HOW COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT HURT YOU ______________

____
TELL
TECHNOLOGY
KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF MY COPYRIGHT

HONORING THOSE WHO GAVE THEIR ALL
SO WE MIGHT HAVE OUR
PROPERTY RIGHTS
THANK YOU

______________________________________________________________________________________________
ALL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY STARTS with a Pencil &Paper in 2D(dimension)
Everything Else about IP(intellectual property) comes down to COMMERCE .
_______________________________________________________________________________________________