IMPACT®

New trade mark blog on the block... Class 46

Class 46 is an 'experimental' trade mark blog recently launched on-the-quiet by 'friends and supporters of Marques', notably including well-known IP academic and IPKat co-founder Jeremy Philips. I'm guessing that the blog is so named because of the 45 classes of goods and services used for trade marks.

Unless the launch without fanfare is the 'experimental' element of the blog, I'm not sure what is (and that's not a criticism; it's a very good read). If developments in trade mark law are relevant to your business or legal pratice, add Class 46 to your favourites.

Amazon launches DRM-free digital music service

There have been some big developments in digital music in recent weeks, mainly from e-commerce giant Amazon.

The website has announced that it is launching a DRM-free digital music service. Not only that, but the service will feature music from all the big 4 record labels: Sony, EMI, Warner and Universal.

This puts Amazon into direct competiton with iTunes, the dominant digital music service from Apple. Unlike the new Amazon service, iTunes music is normally DRM protected, which has put a lot of people off buying music from there. (There is a limited selection of DRM-free music on iTunes, but these files cost more than their DRM-chained contemporaries.)

The Amazon announcement relates to its US store only - you will have to have a US billing address to buy the digital music. This is disappointing for users of Amazon in other countries, so let's hope that the website launches digital music services outside the US in the near future.

The other development is that Apple has agreed to reduce the price of tracks in its iTunes UK store to the same price as iTunes stores in the rest of Europe, following pressure from the European Commission.

US Air Force takes off for cyberspace

It will be no surprise to those who know me that my eye was caught by an astonishing report on the Computing site, about the US Air Force setting up a unit dedicated to "both offensive and defensive cyberspace operations". 

Led by a 2-star general no less, it is reported that the unit will (rather ominously) "co-ordinate with physical armed forces in order to target and attack those enemies with a hostile presence in cyberspace".

This in itself is not surprising. Last month (among others) The Times reported huge levels of cyber espionage against not only government and military targets in the west, but also businesses and even city law firms involved in major contracts.  Cyberspace is also a environment tailor-made for terrorist groups  waging "asymetrical warfare".

So, it was always inevitable that the Pentagon would focus its attention on cyberspace sooner rather than later. What IS jaw-dropping however is the sheer scale of the initiative.  By the time it is fully operational at the ends of 2008, the unit will have - wait for it - THIRTY THOUSAND staff (that's a 3 and 5 zeroes).

By contrast, following last month's alarms, UK chief security officers were said to have described our own government’s response as “not fit for purpose” and “like neighbourhood watch”. 

And they say we're becoming more and more like the US every day... sounds like we could do worse.

Model behaviour: ICO issues draft model publication scheme

In mid-December 2007 the Information Commissioner's Office issued a new draft model Freedom of Information publication scheme. The ICO states in its press release that it aims to publish the final version in June 2008, so that public authorities can adopt it as their own publication schemes.

A publication scheme is the policy document of a public authority on:

• What types of information will be made public as a matter of course; and
• When that information will be made public.

Sections 19 and 20 of the Freedom of Information Act provide that publication schemes must be approved by the ICO; the exception is model publication schemes, where approval is not needed provided that the scheme is used without any alterations.

Interestingly, the ICO states that:

"First and foremost, this document is a contract between each public authority and the ICO rather than a guide to information for the public."

This is a new angle on the role of publication schemes; whilst Section 19 of the Freedom of Information Act makes it a legal duty for public authorities to adopt, maintain and comply with a publication scheme, this is a duty imposed by the Act, not by contract. It therefore seems that the ICO's contract terminology is a way of thinking (or, more likely, the way that the ICO wants public authorities to think) about publication schemes.

Preparing for the .ASIA landrush

The 'landrush' period for the new .ASIA domain begins on 20 February, ending on 12 March 2008. During this period anyone can apply for a .ASIA domain name can do so, with any domain name receiving multiple applications being auctioned between those that applied. About 2 weeks after the landrush period ends, .ASIA will throw its doors open to all, with the first-come-first-served application system starting.

Brand owners have until 15 January if they wish to take advantage of the 'sunrise' period during which their brand ownership will help in securing domains connected with their brands.

Links

DotAsia press release

DotAsia website

UK gov launches copyright exemptions consultation

In a widely reported development, the UK government, through the UK Intellectual Property Office, has launched a consultation on reforming the exemptions given under the Copyright Designs & Patent Act 1988.

If you want a translation of the above from IP-legalese into English, look no further than the introduction to the consultation by Lord Triesman. Triesman says:

"In December 2006, Andrew Gowers reported his findings on the UK’s Intellectual Property regime. While he concluded that the system was broadly satisfactory he identified a number of areas where improvements could be made. These included modifying copyright rules to improve access to, and use of, copyright material for private individuals, students and libraries. This consultation looks carefully at how those adjustments might be made."

For most people, the most relevant question being consulted on is: should we have a right to take personal copies of CDs? This is the issue that the media has caught on to when reporting this story: see the BBC and the Registry. As we've noted on the blog a number of times (including in our piece on the recent legal action by the RIAA in the USA), there is no right to take a personal copy of copyright works, although this is something that a lot of people do as a matter of course.

The IPKat has helpfully listed the 66 questions asked, so if you're interested in responding, the 'Kat's post is a good place to start.

Links to the consultation

Copyright exemptions consultation document - PDF

Copyright exemptions consultation document - Word

“The Telephone Gambit” Casts Shadows on Legacy of Alexander Graham Bell

Telecommunications Industry News brings us news of what sounds like a fascinating book:

"In The Telephone Gambit: Chasing Alexander Graham Bell’s Secret, journalist, Seth Shulman argues that Bell – with the help of aggressive lawyers and a corrupt patent examiner – improperly accessed patent documents that Gray had filed, then falsely claimed credit for the invention. Shulman believes that Bell’s own lab notebook, which wasn’t widely available until 1999, supports his conclusion."

Introducing Certified Open

Just a quick post to notify you of an emerging standard that could prove equally important for both IT purchasers and suppliers.

Certified Open is a new standard for software, designed to promote fair competition in the IT industry that I learned about at the Open Source Summit in November 2007. In particular, the standard aims to address "lock in", the problem that IT users face of being stuck with a particular IT system once implemented simply because that system is not compatible with the IT systems offered by competititors. Because of lock-in, a quick decision by a business to use a particular IT system can become very costly over time.

IT suppliers can have their software, hardware and services evaluated against the standard and, if successful, be certified as compliant with the standard. A 3-month free trial for suppliers ends on 31 January 2008.

If Certified Open becomes widely adopted, it promises to be really useful for IT purchasers, who will know which potential suppliers provide IT solutions that do not hinder their ability to choose other IT solutions in the future.

Link

Certified Open website

The day the music died: US record industry sues man for ripping own CDs to computer

From The Register and IPKat comes the news that the Record Industry Association of America (RIAA) is suing a man for ripping music CDs to his computer. The allegation isn't that the defendant, one Jeffrey Howell of Arizona, distributed the resulting 2,000 music files on the internet. He didn't. Mr Howell also appears to have bought the CDs in question, and the RIAA isn't contesting that.

This legal action surprises us at IMPACT®. Judging by the tone of the 117 comments that the Register's story has received so far (sample headings "Ludicrous", "Ridiculous", "That's it they have finally lost the plot"), it's taken many others by surprise too.

We're UK, not US, lawyers here and this is a US legal action. I had been under the impression that, under US law, the copyright law fair dealing provisions allowed people to take personal copies of copyright works (such as music) that they had purchased. If the RIAA is right, this isn't the case. I haven't seen any comments by US IP law bloggers on this matter, and would welcome clarification on this point.

UK copyright law does not allow people to take personal copies of copyright works; to do so is technically copyright infringement. However, the UK music industry has largely decided to turn a blind eye to the practice. Most computers today come equipped with software allowing users to rip their music CDs on to their computers (Windows Media Player, anyone?); a lot of people do so simply because it is convenient to have their music collection ready to play at the click of a mouse button rather than having to hunt around for the physical CDs.

Given that most use of digital music players involves music files ripped from CDs, the RIAA's actions will damage confidence in the digital music player market. Perhaps more seriously, the RIAA's actions could alienate even more people than the various legal actions against people distributing music on P2P sites such as Kazaa did.

If this case comes to trial, it will be interesting to see if the RIAA manages to get a jury where no one has a digital music player with ripped music on it, or has ever recorded music on to cassette from the radio.

Data protection - more signs of unrest

More today on the increasingly militant climate on data protection - this time, says the Times online, it's MP's calling for tougher, criminal sanctions for breaches of data security - like the recent debacle at HMRC.

What's that, you cry - our MP's calling for penalties which could be applied to them if they ever attain ministerial rank ? How noble, though cynics may ask whether these are the same MP's who recently claimed credit for the Freedom of Information Act while seeking to exempt themselves from its more tiresome provisions.

We should not perhaps get too excited - the call for tougher penalties came from the Commons Justice Committee, a cross-party group chaired by Liberal Democrat Alan Beith. Still smarting from the embrassment of both the HMRC affair and its failures to "understand" its own legislation on party funding, HMG is perhaps unlikely to embrace any radical changes to the data protection regime just at the moment.