September 1, 2014
Copyright Infringement, Hacking and Celeb Photos

ladyprydian:

fyeahcopyright:

Hacking into someone else’s phone is illegal in the US, under both state and federal law.

"Unauthorized access" entails approaching, trespassing within, communicating with, storing data in, retrieving data from, or otherwise intercepting and changing computer resources without consent." It’s also explicitly illegal to extort money regarding computer hacking ("with intent to extort from any person any money or other thing of value…") so that situation may be relevant for the images posted online his weekend as well.

Further, unauthorized distribution of someone else’s photos that you only have because you hacked into their phone or online account - whether you do so for free or by selling them - is copyright infringement. The person who took the photos is the one who ownes the copyright (or they’re owned by the person who arranged for them to be taken). So not only does the person who allegedly hacked into Jennifer Lawrence’s image storage account face possible jail time for hacking, that person faces significant penalties for copyright infringement.

It is possible that redistributing the photos - as sites like Perez hilton have done - may also be copyright infringement, and it’s possible that the lawyers for the actresses in question may use the DMCA to have the photos taken down, prevent their purchase by and distribution on other sites. If a news or entertainment site really wants to report on it, they can do so without showing the photos in full (it might be fair use to show only a subject’s face).

A developing story, link:

Buzzfeed

August 31, 2014
Copyright Infringement, Hacking and Celeb Photos

Hacking into someone’s phone is illegal in the US, both under state and federal law.

"Unauthorized access" entails approaching, trespassing within, communicating with, storing data in, retrieving data from, or otherwise intercepting and changing computer resources without consent." It’s also explicitly illegal to extort money regarding computer hacking ("with intent to extort from any person any money or other thing of value…") so that situation may be relevant for the images posted online his weekend as well.

Further, unauthorized distribution of someone else’s photos that you only have because you hacked into their phone or online account - whether you do so for free or by selling them - is copyright infringement. The person who took the photos is the one who ownes the copyright (or they’re owned by the person who arranged for them to be taken). So not only does the person who allegedly hacked into Jennifer Lawrence’s image storage account face possible jail time for hacking, that person faces significant penalties for copyright infringement.

It is possible that redistributing the photos - as sites like Perez hilton have done - may also be copyright infringement, and it’s possible that the lawyers for the actresses in question may use the DMCA to have the photos taken down, prevent their purchase by and distribution on other sites. If a news or entertainment site really wants to report on it, they can do so without showing the photos in full (it might be fair use to show only a subject’s face).

August 29, 2014
Find me at DragonCon, get a badge ribbon!
Here’s where FYEAHCOPYRIGHT’s Heidi will definitely be:

YA Rules! Saturday, 1pm at a707 at the Marriott: 
Fan culture influences popular culture and drives media trends. This discussion covers fanfic, Tumblr culture, Wattpad, and more.  Panelists: Lev Grossman, Naomi Novik, Heidi Tandy, Casey Fiesler, Jennifer Clack (Moderator)


Future of the Potterverse, Saturday at 5:30 at Hyatt South: Speculation the future of HP, including the Fantastic Beasts movie, JKR’s new play, and the short story recently published in USA Today.  Panelists: Travis Heerman, M.B. Weston,Heidi Tandy, Aja Romano, Tara McMurdy (Moderator), Jennifer Clack

Find me at DragonCon, get a badge ribbon!
Here’s where FYEAHCOPYRIGHT’s Heidi will definitely be:

YA Rules! Saturday, 1pm at a707 at the Marriott:
Fan culture influences popular culture and drives media trends. This discussion covers fanfic, Tumblr culture, Wattpad, and more. Panelists: Lev Grossman, Naomi Novik, Heidi Tandy, Casey Fiesler, Jennifer Clack (Moderator)


Future of the Potterverse, Saturday at 5:30 at Hyatt South: Speculation the future of HP, including the Fantastic Beasts movie, JKR’s new play, and the short story recently published in USA Today. Panelists: Travis Heerman, M.B. Weston,Heidi Tandy, Aja Romano, Tara McMurdy (Moderator), Jennifer Clack

August 23, 2014
AO3 Accounts

snickfic:

Probably all my followers know this, but in case you don’t: ANYONE can get an account on AO3. You don’t have to be a writer, artist, or other fanart creator. All you have to do is request an invite, and currently I believe the wait is something like 24 hours.

Reasons to get an account:

  • You can see all the fic that’s locked to members only! Especially important for sports fandoms where lots of people lock their fic for RPF reasons.
  • You can comment on fics that are locked or have anon commenting turned off.
  • You can use AO3’s bookmark function (which some people use as a rec function, for example)
  • You can turn on the history function, which then keeps track of EVERY FIC YOU EVER CLICK ON

AO3! Accounts are for everyone! \o/

FYI, all. 

(via fannishtalk)

August 22, 2014
acafanmom:

heidi8:

Vote for our panel! And a few others, too!
fyeahcopyright:

Every year, South BY Southwest (SXSW) brings tech companies, content providers, nonprofits and thousands of others to Austin, TX to talk about tech, content, privacy, interaction and so much more. 
This year, FYC’s heidi8, along with flourish and wordplaying, have submitted a panel proposal on How Not to Irk Your Fandom. If it’s selected, they’ll be talking about interactions between fandoms and The Powers That Be - or Those Who Want To Control Fandom - where things have gone terribly wrong and where things have been reasonably right. They’ll also share some Best Practices for how to keep glitches to a minimum and develop positive fan/creator interactions. As a sociologist, a transmedia producer and an attorney, they bring three diverse perspectives to the discussion. 
You can also vote for flourish - along with Henry Jenkins and theorlandojones - who have a film panel proposal at http://panelpicker.sxsw.com/vote/42402 - you do have to register to vote, but it’s easy and they don’t spam. 
(And if you can reblog/share the link, we would really appreciate it!)

Other friends that have panels up for consideration: 
1. Andrew Slack of thehpalliance has an SXSWEDU panel on Super Heroes for Social Justice
2. bookshop, Alexandra Edwards, Yashoda Sampath and Amber Gordan have a proposal on fan/creator interactions from the fan and platform perspectives. 
3. jaybushman is part of a proposal on funding webserieses. 
4. Megan Westerby, Cory Lubovitch of the-real-team-starkid, Sarah Weichel and Rae Votta hope to present on the state of YouTube.

Do a search on just the word “fan” to know why the panels on fan/producer relations are so, so important. Every other panel is on how to monetize fandom, seriously.

Time is running out to vote on panels up for consideration at South By Southwest 2015 - there are some terrific panels and sessions up for consideration linked above, and the crowdsourced votes impact what panels the SXSW programming team includes at the convention. 

acafanmom:

heidi8:

Vote for our panel! And a few others, too!

fyeahcopyright:

Every year, South BY Southwest (SXSW) brings tech companies, content providers, nonprofits and thousands of others to Austin, TX to talk about tech, content, privacy, interaction and so much more. 

This year, FYC’s heidi8, along with flourish and wordplaying, have submitted a panel proposal on How Not to Irk Your Fandom. If it’s selected, they’ll be talking about interactions between fandoms and The Powers That Be - or Those Who Want To Control Fandom - where things have gone terribly wrong and where things have been reasonably right. They’ll also share some Best Practices for how to keep glitches to a minimum and develop positive fan/creator interactions. As a sociologist, a transmedia producer and an attorney, they bring three diverse perspectives to the discussion. 

You can also vote for flourish - along with Henry Jenkins and theorlandojones - who have a film panel proposal at http://panelpicker.sxsw.com/vote/42402 - you do have to register to vote, but it’s easy and they don’t spam. 

(And if you can reblog/share the link, we would really appreciate it!)

Other friends that have panels up for consideration: 

1. Andrew Slack of thehpalliance has an SXSWEDU panel on Super Heroes for Social Justice

2. bookshop, Alexandra Edwards, Yashoda Sampath and Amber Gordan have a proposal on fan/creator interactions from the fan and platform perspectives. 

3. jaybushman is part of a proposal on funding webserieses. 

4. Megan Westerby, Cory Lubovitch of the-real-team-starkid, Sarah Weichel and Rae Votta hope to present on the state of YouTube.

Do a search on just the word “fan” to know why the panels on fan/producer relations are so, so important. Every other panel is on how to monetize fandom, seriously.

Time is running out to vote on panels up for consideration at South By Southwest 2015 - there are some terrific panels and sessions up for consideration linked above, and the crowdsourced votes impact what panels the SXSW programming team includes at the convention. 

August 20, 2014
How US Courts Created the Internet

For those on the internet in 1990 or 1994 or 1998, the question of what laws would apply to online interaction, content and software had the potential to impact every aspect of the online experience.

At least in the US, which “owned” the Internet through much of the 90s (because the Internet started as a US Dept. of Defense project) lawyers were arguing that the Copyright Act shouldn’t or didn’t apply to the Internet (it did; it does). Lawmakers were passing laws that said that all content on the internet had to be safe under “contemporary community standards” - but what community? The town where someone lived, the city where the servers were hosted, or something else entirely? 

And where could site operators be sued or individuals charged with violations of the law? What court, what state, what country? Did extradition treaties apply when the violations in question were virtual? 

Were site operators publishers of every bit of content that they hosted? Were they the authors? Were they common carriers? 

Everyone could argue by analogy - that’s the way that laws grow and change in the (US) courts - and the outcome of these six cases is what makes the Internet what it is today. 

Had Reno v ACLU gone the other way, there could have been risks to the fannish gift economy because there would have been, as Justice Stevens wrote, broad suppression of speech addressed to adults.

Had the Netcom case (re Scientology) gone the other way, linking to another site would have been seen as infringement of the linked site. The ruling also set the stage for not requiring sites to prescreen content. 

Had Zeran v AOL gone the other way, the Communications Decency Act would have been eviscerated, every website would have had to review every piece of content before it was posted, and YouTube, Twitter, Google’s search algorithms, Facebook, Twitch, DeviantArt and the AO3 would not be able to exist; there aren’t enough hours in the day for every piece of content on any of those sites to be reviewed. 

Had ProCD gone the other way, Terms of Use agreements might be more intrusive, or might not exist at all; either way, it set out guidelines and boundaries for how clickwrap agreements work (although not browserwrap agreements in the 9th circuit, which issued a weird ruling this week). 

Had Perfect 10 gone the other way, image databases would be limited and not as useful as they are. Because the court in Perfect 10 ruled as they did, you can use Google Image Search to find out who created fanart that comes across your Dash or FB feed and correctly give credit to the artist and reblog the artist’s original post rather than someone else’s repost of it. It also fundamentally expanded the definition of “transformative works” which is useful for anyone who creates fanworks. 

We would add that Ashcroft v Free Speech Coalition in 2002 should also be added to any list of Cases That Made The Internet What It Is, because it held that it would violate the First Amendment to make it illegal to posses a work that contained even a single depiction of sexual activity among minors, like those found in filmed versions of Romeo and Juliet or in American Beauty, without inquiry into the work’s redeeming value. And yes, had Ashcroft gone the other way, many gifs (and scenes from certain shows and films) would have violated the CPPA - and Congress might have tried to expand the ban to textual works, too. 

1996 EFF Blue Ribbon to protest internet censorship

August 12, 2014
Every year, South BY Southwest (SXSW) brings tech companies, content providers, nonprofits and thousands of others to Austin, TX to talk about tech, content, privacy, interaction and so much more. 
This year, FYC’s heidi8, along with flourish and wordplaying, have submitted a panel proposal on How Not to Irk Your Fandom. If it’s selected, they’ll be talking about interactions between fandoms and The Powers That Be - or Those Who Want To Control Fandom - where things have gone terribly wrong and where things have been reasonably right. They’ll also share some Best Practices for how to keep glitches to a minimum and develop positive fan/creator interactions. As a sociologist, a transmedia producer and an attorney, they bring three diverse perspectives to the discussion. 
You can also vote for flourish - and theorlandojones - who have a film panel proposal at http://panelpicker.sxsw.com/vote/42402 - you do have to register to vote, but it’s easy and they don’t spam. 
(And if you can reblog/share the link, we would really appreciate it!)
You can also leave a comment, or Share the voting info via Twitter, FB and G+ here, too! 

Every year, South BY Southwest (SXSW) brings tech companies, content providers, nonprofits and thousands of others to Austin, TX to talk about tech, content, privacy, interaction and so much more. 

This year, FYC’s heidi8, along with flourish and wordplaying, have submitted a panel proposal on How Not to Irk Your Fandom. If it’s selected, they’ll be talking about interactions between fandoms and The Powers That Be - or Those Who Want To Control Fandom - where things have gone terribly wrong and where things have been reasonably right. They’ll also share some Best Practices for how to keep glitches to a minimum and develop positive fan/creator interactions. As a sociologist, a transmedia producer and an attorney, they bring three diverse perspectives to the discussion. 

You can also vote for flourish - and theorlandojones - who have a film panel proposal at http://panelpicker.sxsw.com/vote/42402 - you do have to register to vote, but it’s easy and they don’t spam. 

(And if you can reblog/share the link, we would really appreciate it!)

You can also leave a comment, or Share the voting info via Twitter, FB and G+ here, too! 

August 12, 2014
rivkat:

gbgordon:

Bwahaha, ouch.

So, funny and all, but the story that is the basis for this joke was heavily distorted by business interests that don’t want consumers to have any rights when they’re hurt. Please take a look (scroll down) at the burns inflicted on the woman who sued McDonald’s because its coffee was too hot.  (Warning: these images are grim.)  If, after you look at those burns and read about how many times McDonald’s had been warned about this problem, you think she was abusing the American legal system, then I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

rivkat:

gbgordon:

Bwahaha, ouch.

So, funny and all, but the story that is the basis for this joke was heavily distorted by business interests that don’t want consumers to have any rights when they’re hurt. Please take a look (scroll down) at the burns inflicted on the woman who sued McDonald’s because its coffee was too hot.  (Warning: these images are grim.)  If, after you look at those burns and read about how many times McDonald’s had been warned about this problem, you think she was abusing the American legal system, then I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

August 11, 2014
Not legal, but we’re boosting the signal

heidi8:

rufiozuko:

oh my god… i just found out my dear, old friend, robin williams has past away. this is horrible news. 

rest in peace peter pan.

o captain, my captain.

If you or someone you know needs help, please call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-TALK (8255).

If you’re in the UK: Ring Samaritans on 08457 90 90 90 for someone to talk to, or talk to your GP.

For more numbers, resources and sites, click here. 

August 9, 2014
The NCAA Case & Other IP Boundaries

You may have seen a number of legal topics on tumblr and in the news over the last week:

  1. Wikipedia is refusing to take down a “selfie” of a monkey, claiming that the monkey owns the copyright in the photo, even though under copyright law in the UK (where the photog claiming copyright is from) and in Indonesia (where the photo was taken), only natural persons (ie humans) and corporations can, under current law, hold a copyright - and under UK copyright law, the person who “creates” the photo is the copyright-holder, even if she or he didn’t push the button to capture the image. 
  2. The eschergirls have gone through a complicated and frankly (at least initially) unfair battle with artist Randy Queen, who chose to use tumblr’s DMCA process to demand tumblr take down posts on the eschergirls’ website, even though in doing so, he was claiming - but it’s all okay now, because they actually had the law on their side. In other words, it’s legal to include images or clips or quotes from someone’s work to comment on them, criticize them, or report on/about/regarding them. 
  3. The ruling re NCAA players' images and names, which says that as of 2016, NCAA players will be able to be paid for the use of their likeness and names in commercial content such as video games, apps and calendars - and yes the ruling will apply to male and female athletes. 
  4. Twitch incorporated a YouTube-like music-finding-and-removing process on archived content on its site, upsetting gamers, uploaders and users alike, because so much content on Twitch includes audio from games - including music that was getting flagged by their new monitoring system. Twitch has since pulled back on some of its original plans, and have removed the maximum time limit on highlights, and added in an appeal button (that, per the DMCA really should have been there from the start) to deal with things that may have been incorrectly flagged for copyright infringement. 

What do all these topics have in common? 

A few things: 

A. Noncommercial use of someone else’s content - whether it’s copyrighted or contains a trademark - often not infringement. You can still take photos of NCAA players - or low-or-medium-resolution images of an artist’s art - and share them on facebook or tumblr, print them in a newspaper or include them in a vlog. However, the minute you put those works in a calendar that’s sold at the mall or include them on a commercially sold DVD, there may be licensing issues at stake. 

B. Listening to your userbase is important - but what may be more vital to a vibrant community is thinking through your actions before you take them. We’ve posted recently about how important it is to have an up to date Terms of Use - but Twitch still hasn’t updated its ToU, which means it doesn’t apply correctly to how the site is operating these days. Twitch made a decision about audio without dealing with all the possible ramifications, and Mr Queen jumped to a DMCA complaint without really considering what rights he was legally able to restrict regarding his work. And the NCAA made a decision that it owned player images, names and faces and could do whatever they wanted with them - and the players themselves could do nothing with them - which does nothing to further “amateurism” and pisses off the players, their friends and families, and their fans. 

C. The photog whose camera was used by a monkey to take a selfie should continue to argue that monkeys can’t hold copyright under either Indonesian or British law, but stop stressing about it and find new ways to monetize his newfound fame, perhaps by selling the rights to his story - although not the monkey’s - to the BBC; it would make for a fun episode of Doctor Who. 

D. If you get a DMCA notice, that doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re in the wrong. Ask the community here on tumblr, or ask on Twitter or FB, or drop us an Ask, because sometimes Twitch will catch and take down something that’s Fair Use, or an artist will claim copyright when you’re engaging in commentary about his or her work, or the NCAA will say they own your face (though they don’t). 

And if you’re coming to DragonCon, I’m (this is Heidi) hoping to host an FYeahCopyright meetup sometime on Saturday, depending on my schedule, to chat about legal issues and fandom, possibly with chocolate nachos to fuel our discussion. More info when I have it!