On today's podcast we discuss the (near) end of the AT&T/T-Mobile deal, MegaUpload vs. UMG and YouTube, and SOPA. We also have an extended interview with Robert Levine, author of Free Ride, How Digital Parasites are Destroying The Culture Business, and How the Culture Business Can Fight Back.

Listen to Podcast

Subscribe to the podcast here

My original plan had been to write up a quick summary of today's markup, but at this writing, the House Judiciary Committee has discussed less than half of over 50 pending proposed amendments to SOPA. However, there's a clear trend in the committee regarding amendments—nearly every one voted on so far has been defeated.

I'd been live-tweeting a blow-by-blow of the proceedings so far, but the main takeaways from the markup are probably best recounted thematically, rather than chronologically, since a lot of themes get repeated with each amendment 's introduction and debate.

There's various levels of debate being engaged in during this markup. First, there's the discussion of the bill text. Then there's the discussion of the bill's effects. Third is the discussion of proponents' and opponents' motives.

Warner Bros. on Monday admitted to removing content from Hotfile.com that Warner never even looked at and didn’t actually own.  The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), currently pending in the House of Representatives, give companies like Warner incredible new levels of power that they have never had under the DMCA.  If Warner’s recklessness under the current legal framework shows us anything, it’s that Congress’ proposition to give these kinds of companies even greater power is about as sensible as parents giving to their teenager the keys to the brand new family car after he just got a DUI crashing the old one. 

Hotfile, an online locker service, went beyond its legal obligations to accommodate movie studio Warner Bros. to take down infringing content from Hotfile’s site.  Warner is even quoted as praising Hotfile’s efforts and suggesting that Hotfile provide the same service to other content owners.  So what did Hotfile get in return?  Warner wrongfully deleted files it didn’t own and then sued Hotfile with four other major studios, all represented by the MPAA, claiming Hotfile’s service carried out “unabashed theft” of their copyrighted works.  Betrayed Hotfile is now fighting back with a counterclaim against Warner for DMCA violations and fraud.

Torrentfreak recently ran a fascinating pair of opinion pieces from two lawyers regarding whether or not someone could be liable for copyright infringement if someone else used their open WiFi connection. One attorney, Nicholas Ranallo, walks through the established law of direct and secondary copyright liability, and comes to the conclusion that generally, no, you're not liable for someone else's infringements using your connection. The other attorney, Marc Randazza, doesn't discuss copyright liability, but instead starts drawing out hypotheticals about the law of negligence.

UPDATE: Added mention of the $35 appeal fee in the "Appeals" section below.

Today, major ISPs joined the RIAA and MPAA in announcing a joint program to deal with file-sharing. The document governing this agreement, a "Copyright Alert System," is hosted here. Public Knowledge and the Center for Democracy and Technology issued a joint statement on the CAS, available here.

Beyond that, what does this agreement represent? It extends some of the characteristics of some ISPs' existing voluntary notice-forwarding agreements, while stopping short of a three-strikes-and-you're-out procedure.

The Senate is gearing up for another go-round on rogue websites legislation, and this time, they've jettisoned the "COICA" label in favor of calling it the "PROTECT IP Act." Like a summer blockbuster sequel, it tightens up some things, adds a few new villains, but in the end reprises the same general plot.

Yesterday, IMSLP, a website dedicated to archiving public domain sheet music lost its domain name due to a complaint sent by the UK’s Music Publishers Association to the site’s registrar, GoDaddy. The notice incorrectly claimed that IMSLP’s copy of Rachmaninoff’s The Bells infringed copyright. (Coverage by TorrentFreak, Michael Geist, and BoingBoing.)

Public Knowledge has proposed changes to three key portions of copyright law:  (1)  notice and takedown procedures;  (2) how to handle “incidental” copies of material and (3) digital music licensing, as part of the organization’s Copyright Reform Act project.

Three papers, each on one of those topics, as well as the other papers from the Copyright Reform Act project, are posted here.

PK President Gigi B. Sohn announced the policy recommendations today by in connection with the 10th anniversary of the establishment of the Samuelson Law, Technology and Public Policy Clinic at the University of California at Berkeley School of Law.  The project was undertaken in conjunction with the Samuelson clinic and Stanford Cyberlaw Clinic.

Today we, along with EFF and the Open Technology Initiative, filed comments in the Department of Commerce’s Internet Policy Task Force Inquiry on Copyright Policy, Creativity, and Innovation in the Internet Economy.  The Task Force, run by the NTIA is the Department’s attempt to start thinking about Copyright issues and how they impact the economy.  Our filing might be interesting for you because it summarizes many of the major issues in copyright policy today.