Archive for the 'creative commons' Category

English Abstracts of the Chinese Entries at BlawgDog (Dec. 21th – Jan. 24th)

 

This movie was made by a few Chinese WOW players. The story is well edited and all the episodes are captured from te WOW game. In this remix movie, the story of the dispute between two Chinese governmental departments on the licensing of the WOW and the the players’ rebellion of the electrotherapeutics to the “net-addiction” are narrated perfectly. The controversial electrotherapeutics was invented by a Chinese psychiatrist and supported by some parents. This is a representative work of Remix by grass-roots Chinese netizens. And it is released with CC-By-NC-SA. Watch it at here (I do wish someone may add English subtitles to it).

 

This post is contributed by Mr. Xuhui Chen, a new co-author of BLawgDog and a patent lawyer in China. The essay provides the passing rates of each year’s examination and other detailed analysis.

 

In this issue edited by Luckie Hong, the following news are included: (1) two guys are prosecuted for oporating unauthorized online-game sever of “Audition Dance Battle Online”; (2) A Beijing court ruled that funshion.com infringed copyright by providing downloading; (3) The Measures of payment of the textbooks’ royalties and the Measure of Protection of the Folklores are drafting; (4) Sany group, a major construction machinery producer wins a litigation on its trademark against the figure of “Benz”; (5) Tianjin high technology industry park promulgated a regulation encouraging the endevor of establishing well-known brands; (6) The series cases on the trademark “世界风SHIJIEFENG” was settled by the parties; (7) XGK, a company in Henan province, wins a lawsuit against State Intellectual Property Bureau for its decision of invalitation of the ZL8910393.8 patent; (8) powerdekor, a mojor producer of wood flooring in China, was involved in a patent law suit on its laminate flooring product; (9) Shanghai encourages the application of foreign patent with the maximum of 90,000 RMB financial aid.

 

This post is originally written in English. Click here.

 

This post is translated and extended in English, please click here for the English version.

 

This is a copy of the CNNIC’s notice requesting ISPs stopping to resolve the domain name which are not recorded in Ministry of Industry and Information Technology’s website registration/licensing system.

 

The Hong Kong government proposed a new version of the Proposals for Strengthening Copyright Protection in the Digital Environment. Xie Lin and Donnie co-authored this short post, which briefly introduced the content of the new proposals.

 

In this issue edited by Luckie Hong, the following news are included: (1) Google apologized openly for the first time in the copyright dispute between Google and Chinese authors; (2) A US software firm sues China for 2.2 billion dollars for using its copyrighted software in the Green Dam; (3) 50% increase of the copyright registration in China, 2009; (4) Hanwang, a Chinese company finally agree to sell the “iPhone” trademark to Apple; (5) Hengyuanxiang, a major Chinese woolen provider, was trapped in a trademark dispute on the “figure of a Sheep”; (6) the tademark of “Pierre Cardin” was finally selled to a Chinese company for 37 million euro; (7) A Fujian firm won IP lawsuit against FKK, a Japanese chemical giant; (8) A patent dispute about Mercury-free batteries falls into a vicious cycle; (9) RichtekTechnology, a Taiwan firm, sued AMD and other 5 US companies for patent infringement

 

 

 

 

In this issue edited by Luckie Hong, the following news are included: (1) Zhejiang Higher Court promulgated a guide for hearing the online copyright disputes; (2) A case on the popular book “Mawen’s War” was ruled in Nanjing; (3) The appealing case on the copyright of electronic navigation map in China (the first one in China) was ruled by Guangdong Higher Court; (4) the exposure draft of the new trademark law was submitted to the Legal Affairs Office of the State Council; (5) Google sent a lawyer’s letter to an individula who is raising an objection to the trademark of Google’s Chinese name Guge (谷歌); (6) Beijing No.1 Intermediate people’s Court affirmed the validity of Judger Group’s (a Zhejiang-based garment enterprise) trademark of GEORGE and its figures; (7) The “Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Patent Infringement Dispute Cases” was promulgated by the Supreme People’s Court; (8) the new IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS OF THE PATENT LAW OF THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA was passed by the State Council on 30 Dec. 2009; (9) Unilin loses its acts against patent infringing products of Yekalon in Germany.

 

This post firstly briefed Donnie’s definition of “Public Domain” in the context of Chinese copyright law in his PhD dissertation at China University of Political Science, then introduced the idea of “public domain day” on each January 1st for at this day, many works will fall into the public domain every year. Lastly, the post discussed some famous/interesting Chinese works that will be fall into the public domain since Jan. 1st, 2009.

 

In 2009, 170 entries are published at BLawgDog (including 38 English ones). Among them, Donnie contributed about 120 posts, other co-authors contributed about 40 ones. Then this article highlighted a few interesting posts during the year.

 

I annouced a very quick survey to Chinese twitter users: whether they are living abroad or inside of the GFW. 88.46% responed they stay in China. For the question “if you live inside of the GFW, are you use twitter frequently”, 70.21% said yes they are. For the question “if you live outside of the GFW, after going back to China, will you use twitter frequently”, 52.94% said yes, but 23.53% said he/she will use twitter only when she/he is out of GFW. For the question “Ask 5 of your QQ buddies randomly, how many of them are using twitter.” 53.85% of the respondent said none of their 5 QQ buddies is using twitter, and only 1.92% said all of the 5 QQ buddies are using twitter too.

 

Writen and edited by Luckie Hong, a co-author of BlawgDog, reporting the latest news in IP Law. This issue includes: (1) the promulgation of China’s new Tort Law, in which the ISP’s liability was eventually coded in a questionable way; (2) China association of literature copyright said Google has illegally scanned over 80,000 Chinese books; (3) Taiyuan intermediate peoples court in Shanxi Province issued a warrant of seizure to a karaoke bar for copyright infringement, which is the first time on mainland China; (4) the National Trademark Review and Adjudication Board petitioned to the Supreme Court for the Beijing Court’s rulling of its decision on the “Daohuaxiang” trademark; (5) the dispute of the trademark of *ST Sanlian (SH.600898) will be ruled soon; (6) JNJ (Johnson & Johnson) lost the case on the “Caile” trademark in China; (7) A Newyork listed Shenzhen company was sued for a patent infringement, the damages claimed by the plaintiff was 175 million RMB; (8) Aigo and Netac settled the patent dispute on USB flash drivers; (9) Up to 7 Dec. 2009, the annual number of patent granting is 3007,636.

 

This essay reviews the usage of the term “use” in China’s current Copyright Law, and find its definition is hightly confusional, which leads the uncertainty “individul use” in the list of limitations to the copyright in Art. 22 of the Copyright Law.

 

This post questioned the legitimacy of issuing a warrant of seizure to Karaoke bars for the reason of copyright infringement, which was happened in Taiyuan, the capital city of Shanxi Province.

Key Sentences at 2009 Free Culture Research Workshop

Oct 23 2009, Harvard Law School Hauser Hall 104, Free Culture Research Workshop 09. It is the first Berkman formal event I participated since I arrvied in Boston on 20 Oct. Here are some key sentences at the conference.

terry

 

Terry Fisher: (quotes Walt Whitman’s Song of Myself) “Both in and out of the game, watching and wondering at it.”

[Note: This can be an excellent overall brief to the conference]

 

 

larryLessig: tech today makes possible explosion of non-market production. technology is reviving our earlier sense of how we can produce culture outside of the market paradigm. “professional sex” (production for market) vs “amateur sex” (remix and other free culture production)…  My job as a policy maker is to make sure that both professional and amateur culture can survive…We are not communists…The market isn’t bad, therefore free isn’t inherently good.
 

 

[Note: it always happens in multi-discipline conferences: diverse backgrounds triggered the discussion on the definition of the topics. What is “free culture”?]

 

Lessig: “Strongly resist the idea that Free Culture is Creative Commons. It is not. That would be a failure for CC.”

Lessig: “Free Culture is not just non-market. It is hybrid relationships, it is one strategy to use to continue these relationships.”

 

Gabriella Coleman: “Maybe we can differentiate in the following way: Free Culture vs free culture (explicit vs aggregate dispersed phenomenon).”

I would say “Free Culture” vs “free culture” vs “(free) culture”. – Someone
[Note: forget who said that. while when I searching for this, i found another interesting post by Doc Searls (different context and different contents, but still worth reading)]

 

Mike Linksvayer: Lots of gnashing of teeth re what free culture is and relevance. Stop gnashing and quantify.
 

Aaron Shaw: “we are moving into the Freudian unconscious of the Free Culture movement…the terrain we don’t want to think about it.

 

Giorgos Cheliotis:  “I’d quote: If you want to be wildly interdisciplinary, you must be epistemologically humble.”

 

[Donnie Note: fortunately, ppls shifted to other topics other than the definition…]

 

Lessig: “If Free Culture is innate it doesn’t hurt to educate for it..:) but if it isn’t innate, we should educate to create it.”

Edward Harran: “We need to move from a profit-driven economy to a values-driven economy.”

 

Mike Linksvayer: Need to have case studies of failed free culture platforms.
 

Clay Shirky: “Failure is a feature, not a bug.”

[Donnie note: Free Culture as a movement, or as a practice, it is a problem]

 

Mayo Fuster Morell suggests that free culture may be considered as a social movement because it challenges established production systems.

Thomas Haigh: “Are we researching Free Culture practices or the movement?”

 

Philippe Aigrain: “We must research the practices if we are to research the movement. Only the global landscape gives you a picture.

 

Elizabeth Stark: “Where does the movement end and the research begin?”

 

Kristin Eschenfelder: I think the movement is helpful in consciousness raising that starts people asking questions.

 

Donnie Dong [that’s me]: If free culture has to be a global movement, it must be expanded from sth. about IP to the free dissemination of the information. The reason is: in some late-developed countries like China, the things hindering the “free culture” are far beyond the intellectual property system. On the contrary, the CC’s promotion in China improved people’s consciousness of copyright protection, interestingly. 

 

lessig “We should think about ways to study interesting cultural difference.”

 

“Free Culture can be re-appropriated in each cultural context. Grows very rapidly when there is a challenge. It’s post-modern.”

 

medialabprado Is Twitter part of the Free Culture movement?

 

Mayo Fuster Morell: Facebook is “non-market” in term of users “contributions without monetary retribution”, but not in terms of Facebook company profit.

 

[Donnie’s Note: the following voices are very essential]

 

Herkko Hietanen: “Is this a research or an advocacy workshop? Why are there no dissenting voices around Free Culture and Creative Commons? Are here all Larry’s fans.”

 

“As an academician, I am not interested in the ‘social movement’.”

 

[Donnie’s Note: see the references shared by the attenders via twitter]

 

BiellaColeman http://www.kimberlychristen.com/ —> works on the limits of FC in the context of indigenous groups

Michael Brown: Who Owns Native Culture? Overview of the issues with cultural secrecy:

http://www.williams.edu/go/native/

concept of ‘recursive public’:
http://p2pfoundation.net/Recursive_Public

“The Moral Economy of the English Crowd.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_economy

The trouble of Free Riding
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/tblee/trouble-free-riding 

Open Educational Resource:
http://www.oercommons.org/

Digital Labor Conference Nov. 12-14 New York

http://digitallabor.org/

Another talk by Lessig:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCyaF-Umod0

 

Some script from: http://twitter.com/metamemette
Photo from (sorry Jude use your copyrighted work): http://www.flickr.com/photos/jyew/