This week's Movie Giveaway winner is
Membership ID#57071721
Sign-up for the next Movie Giveaway

Newest InternetMovies.com Inc.
Special/Investigative Report
1.Bit Torrent
A new method of P2P file-sharing has emerged in BitTorrent. The system is community based as you upload parts of the file you are downloading to others who are downloading the same file. Another good thing? It supports resume! One last thing, it's open source!

Webcasters threaten to sue RIAA

A question of antitrust has arisen citing the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) as the target. The Webcaster Alliance which represents hundreds of webcasters claims that the RIAA may be putting many webcasters out of business because of the royalties webcasters are now required to pay. To date no member of the Webcaster Alliance has paid any royalties to copyright owners and are now pushing the matter to court. A response to the question of small webcasters came in the form of a bill called the "Small Webcasters Settlement Act" but did not prove helpful as it still left the majority of webcasters unable to pay. The question now is whether the RIAA have created an anti-trust situation by instituting these royalty payments and what to do about it.

That agreement "appeared to establish an anticompetitive program designed to exclude small radio stations," said Perry Narancic, an attorney representing the alliance. "Now we have people existing in a great sense of uncertainty, because neither of the regimes make economic sense for them."

According to the articles:

'In response, Congress passed the "Small Webcasters Settlement Act" late last year, which created a new plan under which Webcasters could instead pay a percentage of their revenue as royalties. Negotiations between one group of small Webcasters and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) set that rate at between 8 percent and 12 percent of stations' revenue.'

'The Webcaster Alliance cried foul, claiming that it had been left out of negotiations and that those rates would still put the majority of small and hobbyist stations out of business. In the ensuing months, the alliance repeatedly tried to open new negotiations with the RIAA, to no avail.'
(Read More)

Google cache raises copyright concerns

An apparent unintentional breach of copyright-protection has come in a flaw in the popular search engine Google's method of caching webpages. Google's search engine has been found to be caching websites from The New York Times that are supposed to only be available to paying customers. The caching feature of Google's search engine has been useful for people to find content on websites that have been lost but a flaw with it has been allowing people access to information that was intented for paying customers only. Google has been notified of the problem and are now working to fix the flaw.

"We are working with Google to fix that problem--we're going to close it so when you click on a link it will take you to a registration page," said Christine Mohan, a spokeswoman at New York Times Digital, the publisher of NYTimes.com. "We have established these archived links and want to maintain consistency across all these access points."

According to the articles:

'Google offers publishers a simple way to opt out of its temporary archive, and scuffles have yet to erupt into open warfare or lawsuits. Still, Google's cache links illustrate a slippery side of innovation on the Web, where cool new features that seem benign on the surface often carry unintended consequences.'

'The issue is particularly relevant at Google, a company that prides itself on creativity and routinely floats trial balloons for new features and services. Its culture of innovation may become increasingly risky as Google, which draws millions of visitors to its site daily and redirects them to others through secretive search formulas, cements its position as one of the most popular and powerful companies on the Web.'
(Read More)

Sharman can't squeeze antitrust claim

Sharman Networks have been denied the right to sue entertainment companies for antitrust violations. Sharman Networks believes that they are creating the entertainment companies and are banding together to drive online entertainment providers out of business. A U.S. District Judge, Stephen Wilson, did not believe Sharman Networks had the right to file suit as they were not a competitor to the entertainment industry. This does not mean that any decision has been found supporting the entertainment industry, only that Sharman Networks cannot file suit against them.

"Sharman is neither a competitor nor customer in the restrained market, and because its industry is incidental, and not integral, to the alleged anticompetitive scheme," Wilson wrote in the ruling.

According to the article:

'The entertainment industry last year dragged Sharman into the same kind of legal battle that enveloped and humbled Napster. Movie studios and record labels filed suit charging Sharman violated their copyrights by allowing Kazaa users to download music and movie files without permission.'

'Sharman countersued in February, alleging that the entertainment industry violated the Sherman Act by conspiring to prevent the company from providing protected versions of digital media over the Kazaa network. The suit claimed that Sharman and its partner Altnet tried repeatedly to win licenses for copy-protected content to distribute these online but were repeatedly rebuffed by different labels and studios, which presented a single front. Altnet, a content distribution service that is a subsidiary of Brilliant Digital Entertainment, is not party to the Sharman suit.'
(Read More)