Techdirt. Stories filed under "vancouver" Easily digestible tech news... http://www.techdirt.com/ en-us Techdirt. Stories filed under "vancouver"http://www.techdirt.com/images/td-88x31.gifhttp://www.techdirt.com/ Mon, 11 Jul 2011 03:13:17 PDT Vancouver Rioters Trying To Abuse Copyright To Avoid Being Identified, Which Only Helps Identify Them Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110702/01461814950/vancouver-rioters-trying-to-abuse-copyright-to-avoid-being-identified-which-only-helps-identify-them.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110702/01461814950/vancouver-rioters-trying-to-abuse-copyright-to-avoid-being-identified-which-only-helps-identify-them.shtml IshmaelDS was the first of a few of you to submit variations on this story of how some of those involved in the Vancouver riots are trying to stymie attempts by people to identify who they are through the abuse of copyright law. Some folks have set up sites with pictures and videos from the riots, trying to crowdsource the identity of people involved. However, some of those in the videos are making bogus copyright claims to get the content taken down:
"What criminals are now doing is they're claiming that they have copyright notice, or they're the copyright holder of the video because they appear in the video. So YouTube has been taking down videos in the last couple of days."
Of course, this is doubly stupid. Not only is it an abuse of copyright law, but it is basically people identifying themselves in the video, since they have to give their name to YouTube, and YouTube passes that info along:
Texeria uploaded the video on behalf of a friend. He says if criminals were hoping they might be able to hide by making copyright claims they're actually making themselves easier to find because YouTube notifies whoever uploaded the video.

"Basically what it says is, this person, and it lists his name, complained and so I actually have the personal information of the people complaining, and I will then be turning that info over to the police as well."


Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> admission-of-guilt http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110702/01461814950 Tue, 26 Jan 2010 17:59:00 PST Vancouver Olympics 'Brand Protection Guidelines' Almost Entirely Arbitrary Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100114/1227357759.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100114/1227357759.shtml Marcus Carab writes "VANOC (the Vancouver Olympics organization) has a 22-page booklet on their site covering trademark issues around the Olympics.

Most of it isn't new, but I found the description of their method (starts on page 12) to be very interesting. They describe a rubric with six categories that they use to determine if any given reference to the Olympics is potentially infringing. There are a few things about the method that stood out to me (beyond the broader fact that they are essentially attempting to rewrite trademark law as they see fit):
  • Each category is scored from 1 to 3, with a lower score being ideal. There is no option for zero in their ranking, and yet the final grading scale begins with "Unlikely to Infringe" rather than "Not Infringing"
  • They offer a bunch of examples and walk you through the math, then they ignore the outcome in some of them. Seriously. A bakery called "Olympic Bakery" that has existed since 1965 scores a 10 out of 18 on their system ("potential infringement"). Almost as if they realized how ridiculous that was while writing it, they decided to say it falls under "unlikely to infringe" even though it very clearly doesn't by their own math. A few pages later, a Winter Festival scores a "potential infringement", but they class it as "likely to infringe" with no explanation given.
Mostly this is just the same old Olympic shenanigans, but I found this booklet quite illustrative of just how ridiculous things can get."

It sounds kind of like the way they judge some of the events in the Olympics themselves.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> where-do-we-include-the-drake-equation http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100114/1227357759 Fri, 8 Jan 2010 11:44:00 PST Vancouver Train System To Charge Buskers Huge Fees To Play In Stations Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100107/0200567645.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100107/0200567645.shtml get buskers (street performers) to pay performance fees. Now more details are coming out on this story. It really involves TransLink, the Vancouver-area transit authority, and SOCAN, with SOCAN demanding a lot more money from TransLink. Apparently, TransLink quickly caved and agreed to a massive increase in fees, which it is immediately dumping on the buskers themselves -- even though most "venues" cover any such fees themselves. It turns out that Buskers in TransLink stations already had to pay $75/year -- but now if they want to play during the Olympics, that will be a separate $50 fee just for the Olympics, and the new annual fee will probably be around $300. For busking. I wonder what they want to charge you for humming or singing along?

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> gotta-pay-to-busk? http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100107/0200567645 Mon, 21 Dec 2009 08:33:00 PST Vancouver Olympics Demands All Copyrights And Royalties From Musician Just To Hear Her Song Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091220/2321187440.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091220/2321187440.shtml extra special intellectual property rights that go way beyond what would be allowed for any normal business. This includes getting special control over words like "2010," and "Vancouver" if you use them in any way associated with the sporting event known as the Olympics (also protected). It's using these extra rights to stop ticket reselling and to take down signs they don't like (even on private property).

And, of course, acting in a maximalist manner also means little respect for anyone else's intellectual property or free speech rights. We've already noted that some musicians have complained about a contractual gag order, that forbids any musician performing at any Olympics event to speak ill of the Olympics ever. However, it appears that the Vancouver Olympics folks are taking the maximalism even further. Michael Scott points us to a complaint from a musician who wrote a song which she thought the Olympic committee might like. She sent it to them, and was surprised to get back a contract demanding she sign over all ownership and royalties associated with the song before they would even listen to it. And, of course, it would also grant them the ability to do whatever they wanted with the song.

Now, I recognize that many folks in these sorts of business will not listen to/view/read/etc. any sort of "unsolicited" material for fear of later running into a legal fight if something they do is similar. But, as such you just make it clear that you refuse to pay attention to any unsolicited material sent in. You don't send a contract that would require the creator to hand over all copyrights and royalties in a work. I guess, if you're the Olympics, however, you do exactly that.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> nice-one http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20091220/2321187440 Thu, 17 Dec 2009 08:40:00 PST Vancouver Olympics Unhappy With 'Cool Sporting Event That Takes Place in British Columbia Between 2009 and 2011 Edition' Slogan Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091216/0816517384.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091216/0816517384.shtml no exception. In that case, you have to be careful of the use of "Vancouver," "Olympics," and even "2010." So, clothing maker Lululemon decided to come up with a line that mocks these restrictions, with a brand new line of clothing called:
"Cool Sporting Event That Takes Place in British Columbia Between 2009 and 2011 Edition."
Note how careful the company is to avoid any of the restricted words. Nicely done.

Of course, guess who isn't happy? Reader Joe McEnaney alerts us to the news that, even though the Vancouver Olympics can't officially do anything to Lululemon, it has decided to try shaming the company instead, expressing disappointment that the company has "has broken the spirit of Olympic trademark regulations." Of course, even so, the Olympic officials seem to misunderstand what's going on here. They claim:
"We expected better sportsmanship from a local Canadian company than to produce a clothing line that attempts to profit from the Games but doesn't support the Games or the success of the Canadian Olympic team."
But, of course, that's not what's going on here at all. They're not trying to profit off of the Olympic Games. They're trying to profit off of the ridiculous free speech restrictions put in place by the Olympics for no good reason.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> oh-really? http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20091216/0816517384 Mon, 14 Dec 2009 11:48:00 PST Vancouver Art Gallery Ordered To Remove Anti-Olympics Mural Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091211/1638267320.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091211/1638267320.shtml Rob Hyndman sends over the news that a Vancouver art gallery was ordered to remove a mural, because it was viewed as being anti-Olympics. The Olympics, of course, comes to Vancouver in a few months. The mural in question showed five rings, in the usual Olympic pattern, with four of the rings showing a frown face, and the fifth showing a smiley. The mural was hanging outside of the gallery, so the city claims the order to take it down came due to local graffiti laws -- though the gallery says in 10 years, this is the first mural it had to take down. In fact, when the landlord was told to remove the graffiti, he called the city back to ask what graffiti since he didn't see any and assumed the mural was fine, given the history of murals hung there. And, of course, there's already concern over a special law -- passed just for the Olympics -- that gives law enforcement the right to remove signage that they don't like.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> free-speech?-not-with-the-olympics-in-town http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20091211/1638267320 Mon, 7 Dec 2009 23:05:00 PST Vancouver Olympics Silences Indie Rock Acts With Contractual Gag Order Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091204/1659157215.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091204/1659157215.shtml no exception. In the latest move, sent in by drewmo (though he forgot the link, and made us go searching...) is that a Vancouver-based musician, Carey Mercer, is pointing out that the Vancouver Olympic Committee is pushing contracts on musicians that include a gag order against saying anything bad at all about the Olympics.
The Olympics always has a "cultural component," a cultural Olympiad, and this year, to quote their puke-in-my-mouth inducing website, they have made a back-patting hullabaloo about including "cutting edge indie rock." And each and every "cutting edge" performer that has agreed to play has signed a contract that includes the above clause. A clause that states, in case you skimmed over it, that these artists must never say anything negative about an entity that will spend 900 million dollars on "security." An entity that has already infuriated anti-poverty and anti-homeless groups who accuse VANOC of not living up to its promise of providing affordable housing.

Most participating artists claim to be unaware of this clause.
Part of Mercer's complaint is that no one seems to be able to determine if the Olympics is a public or private entity, since censorship by a government entity would seem like a big no-no:
No one, including our courts, can figure out if it is a public or private entity. It seems to be public when it needs tax dollars (6 billion), but private whenever it is challenged...
And, sure, you can understand why the Vancouver Olympics might not want musicians it hires to say anything bad about them, but putting a contractual gag clause in there seems to suggest that the organization simply can't take any criticism. Mercer is also concerned about what this does for the musicians who signed these gag orders, often without realizing it:
When artists are not allowed to critique their government, or the governing agency that endows them with grants and funding, then what they are asking for is nothing more than propaganda.


Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> stay-quiet-now http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20091204/1659157215 Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:26:56 PDT Olympics Trademark Law Insanity: Officials Can Enter Homes, Issue $10,000 Fines Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091023/0449066652.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091023/0449066652.shtml overreach with trademark claims, trying to prevent anyone from using any phrase or word associated with the Olympics without having to pay up. Amazingly -- and to the detriment of the people they're supposed to represent -- politicians all too often grant the Olympics extra special trademark laws that just apply to them. Reader Jesse lets us know of the latest insanity up in Vancouver, where special new "bylaws" let officers enter homes to remove unapproved "signage" while also granting them the ability to issue fines up to $10,000. There are already lawsuits filed about this, but at what point do politicians tell the Olympics "enough is enough?" Update In the comments, reader Brendan points out that Vancouver's police chief is insisting this is an exaggeration, saying:
Just as ridiculous in my opinion, is the charge that the VPD will enter homes to confiscate signage.

Once again, I would ask that those speaking on our behalf, regardless of your motives, please stop, or at least ask us.

The additional powers that the City has obtained are intended to control unauthorized marketing.

If normal processes, such as a warning, ticket or summons, do not convince a person to abide by a by-law, in extreme circumstances, a warrant to enter premises can be obtained.

We have been assured by City license inspectors that they will be focusing on "guerrilla marketing" efforts that are prominent, and near official venues.

They will not be focusing on signage that is a political or personal statement.

The VPD has no intention of entering the home of any Vancouver resident for a sign issue during the Games. We are not the sign police.
Okay... but that still does say that they could get a warrant to enter people's homes for marketing signage. Why, exactly, should that be allowed? On personal property, if someone puts up a "guerilla marketing" sign, shouldn't that be their right?

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> please,-make-it-stop http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20091023/0449066652 Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:53:00 PDT Vancouver Olympics Using Copyright Law (Rather Than Scalping Laws) To Ban Ticket Reselling Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090319/1850154187.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090319/1850154187.shtml abuse of intellectual property law -- is now using copyright law to prevent ticket resales. Now, lots of places around the world have anti-scalping laws that forbid reselling of event tickets (or reselling them above a certain price). Vancouver, however, does not have any such law. No problem for the Olympics folks... they're using the special copyright they were granted on a whole host of common terms, including "Vancouver 2010" to sue resellers offering the tickets. Obviously, that's got nothing to do with the purpose of copyright law, but when you grant silly monopolies, don't be surprised when they're abused.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> misuse-of-copyright http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090319/1850154187