• Welcome
    Sponsors
  • Director
    Members
    Advisory Board
    International Advisory Council
    Research Affiliates
    IPilogue Editors
  • IPilogue
    Events
    Publications
  • JD
    Graduate Program
    Clinical
    Prizes & Awards
  • The IPIGRAM Archive
    Events Archive
    IP in the News
    IP Poll of the Week
    IP Pick of the Week
    Gowlings IPilogue Prize
  • Legislation
    Journals
    Government
  • Contact Us
    Subscribe

Fair Dealing Fine-Tuned: Artmob Pilots New Initiative

January 23, 2011 by Mark Kohras (Managing Editor)

Mark Kohras is a JD candidate at Osgoode Hall Law School.

On 13 January 2011, the Artmob research project hosted a demonstration of the beta version of their software. Members of the community were invited to provide feedback on the intellectual property principles the software attempts to address. The software seeks to focus on a key component of fair dealing: attribution.

Under Section 29 of the Copyright Act, “fair dealing for the purposes of private study, research, news reporting, criticism or review does not infringe copyright”. However, news reporting, criticism and review require an additional component of attribution in order to qualify for protection. Fair dealers must cite the source and, if given in the source, the author, performer, maker or broadcaster of the work in question.

This can be more complicated than it may seem. For example, this video of a poetry reading has seven different rights associated with it: the maker of the video, the performer performing the reading, and five separate authors of a literary work (one for each poem). Artmob allows for the complex attribution of multiple rights embodied in a digital work. This enables content users to credit everyone involved in a work, from rights holders who own a copyright or licence associated with a work, to the multiple performers, authors, makers, etc. who were involved with its creation.

The software also incorporates a powerful social networking function. Aside from simply allowing comments on the videos, Artmob actively encourages users to submit updates to the rights management information associated with digital works. It is hoped that this will aid in discovering the identity of those involved in the creation of a work in cases where the record is incomplete.

Artmob also intends to use its social networking features to facilitate a dialogue between rights holders and the public. The system can incorporate the licence terms a rights holder has associated with a particular work, and provide the opportunity for direct communication between rights holders and potential licensees. This open communication system makes it easier to contact rights holders, thereby increasing access to copyrighted works.

Rights management technologies are becoming increasingly important in the digital age. The internet age is about innovation, but it is also about speed and efficiency. Two decades ago, if I wanted to read a book or listen to a new song I had to drive to the store and purchase it. Today I can purchase a book on Amazon or a song on iTunes and it can be delivered to me instantly over 3G wireless almost anywhere in the world. Sometimes in our haste, important steps are bypassed in the name of expediency. As a society we must ensure we don’t overlook our valued creators of Canadian culture in our rush for instant gratification.

The government has always recognized the need for attribution. Section 14.1(1) of the Copyright Act enshrines the moral right of attribution for authors. Bill C-32 will take this a step further, extending the moral right of attribution to performers. Bill C-32 also recognises the importance of rights management information in digital works by making it illegal to “knowingly remove or alter any rights management information in electronic form without the consent of the owner of the copyright… if the person knows or should have known that the removal or alteration will facilitate or conceal any infringement of the owner’s copyright…”.

Attribution is an important part of copyright. Not only does it enable authors to achieve the recognition they deserve, it also provides future users of works with the knowledge of who to contact to commission similar works or to license works already in existence. This enables us, as users of works, to build upon our cultural history instead of allowing it to fade into obscurity.

For more information on the Artmob beta launch event or to see a demo of the Artmob software, please visit this website.

Posted in Copyright, Fair Dealing, Ownership

2 Responses to “Fair Dealing Fine-Tuned: Artmob Pilots New Initiative”

  1. David, on January 24, 2011 at 1:28 pm Said:

    Excellent summary Mark. Your point about instant gratification being enabled through information and communication technologies also underscores the need for technological approaches to getting more Canadian culture online. The internet is the primary (and sometimes only) information source for many people. A deficit of Canadian culture online can imperil the very cultural forms protected by copyright. Cultural activities in the visual arts and dramatic theatre don’t generate the rich ‘aftermarket’ of consumer goods that music, television, cinema, and publishing do, and as a result limit accessibility to culture. Digital archives and cultural collections can mitigate this situation.

    Incomplete cultural records are a key problem that we are attempting to address in novel ways. In the example of Christian Bök’s reading, the performance is recent and the works are known. However many cultural works that are of interest to arts communities and the public can be far more complicated to license, particularly when they are created for secondary purposes such as marketing and promotion. Think, for instance of composite works such as theatre programs, promotional posters, or of audience video footage of cultural events like Caribana.

    Institutional conservatism can be a substantial factor in determining what is available online. An attribution system that provides a “middle way” between an all or nothing approach to licensing may soften clearance policies and permit the reproduction of orphan works that have been almost entirely – but not completely – licensed. This alone could make a big difference in the scope and quality of Canadian culture accessible online.

  2. Online Global Week in Review 28 January 2011 from IP Think Tank, on January 28, 2011 at 1:04 am Said:

    [...] Fair dealing fine-tuned: Artmob pilots new initiative (IP Osgoode) [...]

Leave a Reply

All replies and responses are moderated and will not appear on the site immediately. Please see our response policy.

« Microsoft battles Apple’s “App Store” Trademark Registration | Stanford v. Roche: the U.S. Bayh-Dole Act and Inventors’ Rights »

Career Opportunities
Osgoode IP Club
Writing Competitions
IP Research Guide

RSS Follow Comments via RSS
  • James Wagner on Copyright at the Edge of Artistic Creativity
  • Ken Anderson on Bill C-11: Through the Lens of Social Norms
  • Courtney Doagoo on Evidence Of Parasitic Intent Not Unfounded: L’Oreal
  • Denis Borges Barbosa on Evidence Of Parasitic Intent Not Unfounded: L’Oreal
  • D Vaver on Disclosure Front and Centre as Pfizer Prepares to Defend Viagra in Supreme Court of Canada
  • Dr. Emir Crowne on Disclosure Front and Centre as Pfizer Prepares to Defend Viagra in Supreme Court of Canada
  • Adam Stevenson on Bill C-11: Through the Lens of Social Norms
  • Anonymous on Should Canada Strengthen IP Protection for Pharmaceutical Products? The European Union Thinks So...
  • Aidan Hollis on Should Canada Strengthen IP Protection for Pharmaceutical Products? The European Union Thinks So...
  • Kalen Lumsden on IP Osgoode Speaker Series: Robert Levine and Dr. Brett Danaher
RSS Follow Posts via RSS
  • One Step Closer: Bill C-11
  • Bergeron Entrepreneurs in Science and Technology (BEST) Program Launches at York
  • Whose Patent is It Anyway?: The Ongoing Legal Legacy Between Samsung and Apple
  • Copyright at the Edge of Artistic Creativity
  • Luksan v. Van der Let, Or Rather, EU v. UrhG?
  • Global Health Challenges and the Role of Law
  • Sampling Questions Still Unsettled After Jay-Z/Kanye West Sampling Settlement
  • World Intellectual Property Day 2012
  • The Legal Implications of Commercializing Intellectual Property Rights
  • Announcement: Global Health Challenges and the Role of Law: the 2012 National Health Law Conference

IP Osgoode would like to send out its IPIGRAM at a time when most convenient for you. Please let us know your views by answering a few questions so that we can better serve you.

Click here to take poll.
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • June 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • Advisory Board (4)
  • Announcements (2)
  • Blogs (4)
  • Book Review (3)
  • Broadcasting Regulatory Policy (5)
  • Cloud Services (3)
  • Commercialization (77)
  • Competition (6)
  • Competition Law (7)
  • Contracts (59)
  • copyright reform (136)
  • defamation (15)
  • Design (6)
  • Development (4)
  • European Union (32)
  • events (75)
  • Fashion Industry (13)
  • Feature Post (126)
  • Freedom of Speech (15)
  • Freedom of the Press (14)
  • Gaming (6)
  • General (145)
  • Human Rights (3)
  • Image (2)
  • Innovation (138)
  • Internet (236)
  • IP (1041)
    • Copyright (522)
      • CD Levy (9)
      • Digital Downloads (64)
      • Digital Libraries (1)
      • Digital Locks (28)
      • Fair Dealing (61)
        • Parody (2)
        • Satire (1)
      • Infringement (124)
      • Internet Sharing (92)
      • Literary Works (52)
      • Moral Rights (9)
      • Movies (47)
      • Music Industry (88)
      • Originality (29)
      • Ownership (81)
        • Licensees (31)
      • Secondary (ISP) Liability (14)
      • Subsidiary Rights (5)
    • IP Reform (19)
    • Patents (331)
      • Access to Medicines (12)
      • Cross Border Issues (48)
      • Electronic Processes (18)
      • Infringement (60)
      • Patent Practice (18)
      • Patent Trolls (20)
      • Patentability (97)
      • Pharmaceutical Drugs (65)
    • Trademarks (201)
      • Domain Names (38)
      • Famous Marks (15)
      • Official Marks (10)
      • Parallel Importation (4)
      • Personality Rights (11)
  • IP Course Topic (11)
  • IP Intensive (4)
  • IP Litigation Practice (15)
  • Jurisdiction (65)
    • Canada (24)
    • Indonesia (1)
    • Japan (1)
    • UK (25)
    • US (28)
  • Law & Music Course Topic (20)
  • Links (3)
  • MediaLaws (6)
  • Music Industry (72)
  • Open-Source (16)
  • Osgoode Alumnus (10)
  • Patents Course Topic (28)
  • Privacy (165)
    • Electronic Databases (36)
    • Human Rights Issues (26)
    • Identity Theft (11)
  • Regulatory Policy (46)
  • Reputation Management (2)
  • Smartphones (10)
  • Social Justice (2)
    • United Nations Development Programme (1)
  • Social Media (23)
  • Supreme Court of Canada (17)
  • Tech Transfer (29)
  • Technology (208)
  • Telecommunications (73)
  • Trade Secrets (3)
  • UK (10)
  • Uncategorized (82)
  • US-Canada Relations (2)
  • WIPO (9)
  • Log in

Home   |   Contact Us  

© 2008 Osgoode Hall Law School York University
4700 Keele Street Toronto, Canada M3J 1P3
T:416.736.5030   F:416.736.5736