A Conversation with Fred von Lohmann
Suggested ReadingsSection 512 of the Copyright Act
Section 512 of the Copyright Act provides certain "safe harbors" for online entities that might otherwise find themselves liable for their role in facilitating, or themselves inadvertantly accomplishing, copyright infringement. One real-world implication of this statutory provision has been the widespread adoption of notice-and-takedown procedures at sites like YouTube and eBay.
20th Century Fox v. Cablevision
In this recent decision, the Second Circuit addressed a modern twist on the old VCR litigation: a DVR-like device where the storage of desired content was largely centralized. Interestingly, the case was litigated on a theory of direct infringement, rather than a theory of indirect liability.
How Hollywood Has Been Trying to Disrupt Disruptive Innovation
One of Fred von Lohmann's most significant concerns is the worry that, under certain legal rules, disruptive technologies will find it unduly difficult to enter existing markets. Fred has a fuller academic paper that lays out the argument more completely; but the linked essay provides a taste, and the ideas are then more richly developed in the audio program.
Sony Corp. v. Universal Studios
This is the most influential copyright case on indirect liability. It had the result of absolving the manufacturer of an early-day VCR from any liability for the copyright infringement that VCR facilitated. The Sony decision inevitably provides the framework for debate over more modern applications, like the Cablevision system discussed below.
