Search Results

Search found 28 results on 2 pages for 'infringement'.

Page 1/2 | 1 2  | Next Page >

  • Copyright infringement - inside the legal minefield

    <b>New Zealand Herald:</b> "Several weeks ago the Australian high court ruled in favour of Aussie ISP iiNet in a landmark legal battle where AFACT (Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft) argued that iiNet was as guilty as some of its subscribers of online copyright infringement."

    Read the article

  • Is there a grey-area with Copyright infringement?

    - by Z.O
    Currently a student, I'm trying to put together a game for iOS. From everywhere I've read, it seems any game's sound and art are apart of their IP and covered under their Copyright. That being said, say I wanted to use the coin sound effect from the original Mario (less than 1s long and used sparsely)... would anyone really care? Having no experience with this, I'm just wondering if cases like this are treated like "Ya you're driving slightly over the speed limit, but nobody cares" or as "you stole that car". Thanks for any insight anyone may be able to provide.

    Read the article

  • Covering Yourself For Copyrighted Materials [on hold]

    - by user3177012
    I was thinking about developing a small community website where people of a certain profession can register and post their own blogs (Which includes an optional photo). I then got to thinking about how people might use this and the fact that if they are given the option to add a photo, they might be likely to use one that they simply find on Google, another social network or even an existing online blog/magazine article. So how do I cover myself from getting a fine slapped on me and to make it purely the fault of the individual uploader? I plan on having an option where the user can credit a photo by typing in the original photographers name & web link (optional) and to make them tick a check box stating that the post is their own content and that they have permission to use any images but is that enough to cover myself? How do other sites do it?

    Read the article

  • Do I have to remove my app from app store? (Copyright infringement)

    - by Smiden
    I just got an copyright infringement notice that says my app infringes on the usage policies of the services my app uses. However, this mail does not come directly from the company that runs the website I pull information from. The mail comes from a company that has some paid apps in the same category on the app store (mine is free), so they obviously want me gone. My question is, can I just ignore this mail until I hear directly from the company that runs the website? Judging from their (the company that contacted me) website, they have no connection what so ever to the company that I fetch information from.

    Read the article

  • Making a mobile app from a board game. Copyright infringement?

    - by Claudio Coelho
    Me and a friend got hooked on a board game and soon realized that we didn't need the board game to play, instead we could play it with pen and paper with extreme ease and satisfaction. The next step was to develop a simple android app to play it. We have been using this to play and it's fun, and we are interested in publishing it, but we are worried eventual copyright issues. The concept of the game - itself very simple, merely a type of trivia game, where each round has different rules - is the same, the name is different as is all the art. Does anybody know if we infringe copyrights if we were to publish it? Thanks

    Read the article

  • How does delicious.com avoid being sued for copyright infringement?

    - by Stanish
    With the recent redesign of delicious.com, they've added a much more graphical home page. The site continues to be a service for people to bookmark and share websites they come across on the web. The delicious home is now made up of images taken from those linked sites. See for yourself at http://delicious.com I would like to know what in the law allows them to do this, considering the images represent the main content of the page, and they clearly do not own copyright to those images? I know there is some leeway given to search engines where it is considered fair use to use a small portion of the content if the aim is to lead people to the originating site. Does that apply here?

    Read the article

  • Do I need to contact a lawyer to report a GPL violation in software distributed on Apple's App Store?

    - by Rinzwind
    Some company is selling software through Apple's App Store which uses portions of code that I released publicly under the GPL. The company is violating the licensing terms in two ways, by (1) not preserving my copyright statement, and not releasing their code under the GPL license and (2) by distributing my GPL-licensed code through Apple's App Store. (The Free Software Foundation has made clear that the terms of the GPL and those of the App Store are incompatible.) I want to report this to Apple, and ask that they take appropriate action. I have tried mailing them to ask for more information about the reporting process, and have received the automated reply quoted below. The last point in the list of things one needs to provide, the “a statement by you, made under penalty of perjury,” sounds as if they mean some kind of specific legal document. I'm not sure. Does this mean I need to contact a lawyer just to file the report? I'd like to avoid going through that hassle if at all possible. (Besides an answer to this specific question, I'd welcome comments and experience reports from anyone who has already had to deal with a GPL violation on Apple's App Store.) Thank you for contacting Apple's Copyright Agent. If you believe that your work has been copied in a way that constitutes infringement on Apple’s Web site, please provide the following information: an electronic or physical signature of the person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of the copyright interest; a description of the copyrighted work that you claim has been infringed; a description of where the material that you claim is infringing is located on the site; your address, telephone number, and email address; a statement by you that you have a good faith belief that the disputed use is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law; a statement by you, made under penalty of perjury, that the above information in your Notice is accurate and that you are the copyright owner or authorized to act on the copyright owner’s behalf. For further information, please review Apple's Legal Information & Notices/Claims of Copyright Infringement at: http://www.apple.com/legal/trademark/claimsofcopyright.html To expedite the processing of your claim regarding any alleged intellectual property issues related to iTunes (music/music videos, podcasts, TV, Movies), please send a copy of your notice to [email protected] For claims concerning a software application, please send a copy of your notice to [email protected]. Due to the high volume of e-mails we receive, this may be the only reply you receive from [email protected]. Please be assured, however, that Apple's Copyright Agent and/or the iTunes Legal Team will promptly investigate and take appropriate action concerning your report.

    Read the article

  • A completely free and open programming language

    - by XGouchet
    With Oracle vs Google trial, it seems that Java is not entirely Open and free (as free software) as I expected. Although there exists completely free/open JVM, it's hard to know what is a copyright infringement with Java, and what is not. So I'd like to know if there is a completely Open and free language with open and free IDE (Eclipse-like) out there, Object Oriented if possible, and able to make window-based applications for the main OSs (Linux, Mac, Windows).

    Read the article

  • How to copyright and license individual code files

    - by Hand-E-Food
    I have a habit of writing small, reusable components in my spare time. I reuse these components with my clients' code bases. It occurs to me there's a potential issue that using identical code for multiple clients may bite me back in the future. I don't care who uses the code. I just don't want a situation where one company tries to sue another for copyright infringement due to my actions. I'm not familiar with common licensing schemes. What do I need to specify in my code files to indicate that these protions are copyrighted to myself and usable by anyone, while differentiating them from the code specificly written for the client? Where can I find more information on this scenario?

    Read the article

  • Can i use aac in an commercial app for free?

    - by Jason123
    I was wondering if i can use the aac codec in my commercial app for free (through lgpl ffmpeg). It says on the wiki: No licenses or payments are required to be able to stream or distribute content in AAC format.[36] This reason alone makes AAC a much more attractive format to distribute content than MP3, particularly for streaming content (such as Internet radio). However, a patent license is required for all manufacturers or developers of AAC codecs. For this reason free and open source software implementations such as FFmpeg and FAAC may be distributed in source form only, in order to avoid patent infringement. (See below under Products that support AAC, Software.) But the xSplit program had to cancel the AAC for free members because they have to pay royalties per person. Is this true (that you have to pay per each person that uses aac)? If you do have to pay, which company do you pay to and how does one apply?

    Read the article

  • Hosting a magnet link site which could possibly infringe copyrighted material?

    - by Griff
    I have for the last 3 months built a crawler, indexer and alot of other things for what started out to be a home project for indexing magnet links on the internet. As my project grew I have thought about releasing my collected data (which at the minute is on a public domain but with no access) to the public. Whatever the crawler sucks in goes in, and whatever the indexer decides to index gets indexed as it is a fully automated process. My question is as follows; Considering that most of the data that is collected from what I have built points to illegal copyrighted material (as most magnet links do) where would it be best to host such a site. I notice all of the already public torrent sites are hosted in India is this because there laws are less strict on copyright infringement? Have any of you hosted such a site, and if so what problems have you ran into? And as always any advice on being a webmaster for this type website?

    Read the article

  • How does Ubuntu achieve RGB subpixel rendering for Mono applications?

    - by user100751
    Distributions in the *Ubuntu ecosystem support proper RGB subpixel rendering in Mono based applications (e.g. Banshee) by default, i.e. out of the box without any additional configuration requirements, whereas e.g. Fedora does not. I am aware of general patent infringement issues and the freetype-freeworld libs, but never managed to enable RGB subpixel rendering for Mono in Fedora - it keeps using greyscale. So, as the question title implies: how does *Ubuntu achieve RGB subpixel rendering in Mono applications?

    Read the article

  • The Apache License, v2.0: Copyright License vs Patent License

    - by user278064
    The Apache License, v2.0 [..] 2. Grant of Copyright License Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense and distribute the Work and such Derivative Works in Source or Object form. [..] 3. Grant of Patent License Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, each Contributor hereby grants to you a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made, use offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work, where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable by such Contributor that are necessarily infringed by their Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their Contribution(s) with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted. If You institute patent litigation against any entity (including cross-claim or counterclaim in lawsuit) alleging that the Work or a Contribution incorporated within theWork constitutes direct or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate as of the date such litigation is filed. While the meaning of the Copyright License provision is rather clear, I did not get the meaning of the Patent License provision. Which advantages does the "Grant of Patent License" provision further give to Contributors? Why are they useful? Is the "Grant of Patent License" provision useful only in case of patent litigation?

    Read the article

  • What is the "default" software license?

    - by Tesserex
    If I release some code and binaries, but I don't include any license at all with it, what are the legal terms that apply by default (in the US, where I am). I know that I automatically have copyright without doing anything, but what restrictions are there on it? If I upload my code to github and announce it as a free download / contribute at will, then are people allowed to modify and close source my work? I haven't said that they cannot, as a GPL would, but I don't feel that it would by default be acceptable to steal my work either. So what can and cannot people do with code that is freely available, but has absolutely no licensing terms attached? By the way, I know that it would be a good idea for me to pick a license and apply it to my code soon, but I'm still curious about this. Edit Thanks! So it looks like the consensus is that it starts out very restricted, and then my actions imply any further rights. If I just put software on my website with no security, it would be an infringement to download it. If I post a link to that download on a forum, then that would implicitly give permission to use it for free, but not distribute it or its derivatives (but you can modify it for your own use). If I put it on GitHub, then it is conveyed as FOSS. Again, this is probably not codified exactly in law but may be enough to be defensible in court. It's still a good idea to post a complete license to be safe.

    Read the article

  • Trying to find a good filehost [closed]

    - by user67481
    I'm looking for a good filehost that I can use to link downloads on my blog (personally created files, no copyright infringement). Been looking at mediafire, but I'm not sure what else is out there that would meet my needs. Ideally wanting something that has no files-per-day-per-user limits, can host individual files of at least 500MB each, and has very little hassle for the users who download from them. I'll pay for a 'premium' or whatever level account if necessary. Any good suggestions? Or will mediafire be my best bet for this?

    Read the article

  • What's your advise on a potential legal suit? [closed]

    - by ohho
    I [xxx app developer] received an email from Apple that a developer [of yyy app] believes I am "infringing their copyright." Description of Issue: [xxx developer] copied my application (my application is [yyy]) feature by feature. Even their donation model is completely copied from my application. Their first release was significantly later than mine, which implies copying of the application rather than parallel development. I suffered significant financial losses because of their actions, in additional to promotion problems as many people are confused with their product. My advertising was based around the idea of a "free [yyy] application for an iPhone" and they have just taken that as a title for their application. I would appreciate if someone takes a look at their release schedule and compare it to my releases. Additionally, please take a look at their functionality and how it point by point copies the functionality of my older releases. I am asking Apple to remove their application from the App Store, and ban them from resubmitting it. Thank you for your time! [yyy developer], the developer of the [yyy] application. My response was: The code of [xxx] is written by myself, using Apple public API. The graphics elements are designed by myself. The user interface and app control are independently designed and different from other [similar type] apps (please judge yourself). In-app Purchase is iOS Apple standard API. iAd is Apple iOS standard API. I don't think features can be owned exclusively. In fact, my app comes with fewer features, as I prefer minimalist design. I don't think idea can be owned exclusively. Apple responded: Thank you for your response. Unfortunately, Apple cannot serve as arbiter for disputes among third parties. Please contact [yyy developer] directly regarding your actions. You can reach [yyy developer] through: [...]. We look forward to confirmation from both parties that this issue has been resolved. If this issue is not resolved shortly, Apple may be forced to pull your application(s) from the App Store. Then I sent my response above to [yyy developer]. [yyy developer] then asked me "to provide (my) legal address and contact details that (his) lawyer requires to file a copyright infringement suit." IMO, I don't think the [yyy developer]'s claim on "feature by feature" copy is valid. I have fewer features, completely different user interface design. However, I don't think I can afford a legal action for an app of so little financial return. So what's your advise on this? Should I just let Apple pull my app? Or is there any alternative I can consider? FYI ... UI of [xxx app]: and UI of [yyy app]:

    Read the article

1 2  | Next Page >