iCopyright "Excerpt" License

We recently received a number of inquiries regarding the excerpt license that is available on articles from publishers using iCopyright. Some bloggers in particular have the impression that iCopyright is trying to profit from selling excerpts that the bloggers believe should be covered under Fair Use. This is not the case! By way of background, the Excerpt License was developed at the request of users who wished to excerpt significant portions of an article for reprinting, posting and use in PowerPoint presentations. These users did not want to include parts of the article that mentioned their competitors, or were otherwise irrelevant for their purposes.

It is also important to note that iCopyright does not choose the services, the terms, or the prices of any of the licenses that its system processes for publishers. If publishers decide to offer an Excerpt License, they choose the terms and prices of that license. They own the content, not iCopyright. In the same way that PayPal has no control over the value or terms of an item that is purchased through its gateway, iCopyright has no control over the value and terms of a piece of content licensed through its gateway.

It is a fundamental principle of iCopyright to be agnostic with respect to the content our service is used on and the rules the owner has associated with the reuse of that content. iCopyright is a technology. It does not set copyright guidelines. It does not enforce copyright. It simply makes it possible for people to easily use and share content under the rules set up by the owners.

SIIA Clips Clipping Services

The Software & Information Industry recently sent the following letter to press clippings and media monitoring services, putting them on notice that their services may be infringing the copyrights of their members:

The Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA) and its publishing members have become aware of the significant and rampant piracy by some companies providing “clipping” or “media monitoring” services that provide clients access to news articles or other copyrighted information, often based on specific subject requirements designated by the client (hereafter referred to as “media monitoring services”). At the urging of our publishing members, SIIA has been asked to conduct an education and enforcement initiative focused on ensuring that media monitoring services understand their obligations under the copyright law and abide by that law.

This letter represents the first step in this initiative. It is being sent to you and all other companies known to offer media monitoring services in the United States, and many abroad. Its primary purpose is to alert you to the steps you need to take to comply with copyright law. The fact that this letter was sent to you does not mean that your company is being targeted. This is not a cease and desist letter. It is our vehicle for educating the “media monitoring service” industry on copyright law as it pertains to this type of activity and alerting them to forthcoming enforcement actions by SIIA against those who choose not to comply with the law.

Accordingly, if your company is compliant with copyright law and has obtained the proper licenses from the relevant copyright owners or their agents, it has nothing to worry about and does not need to fear further action by SIIA. If, however, your company is not complying with the law or you are uncertain whether your company is complying consider this letter both: (1) an opportunity to review your practices further to understand what your company needs to do to become copyright compliant, and (2) formal notice that the publishing industry is concerned about, and focused on, infringements taking place in the media monitoring industry and, in the near future, will be taking steps to enforce their rights against those that fail to adequately heed this warning.

Copyright law dictates the way that business articles can be copied and distributed. Under the copyright laws of all countries, text materials including magazines, newspapers, books and journals are copyright protected, even if published on the “open web.” These laws also give the owner-publisher the right to control the copying and distribution of those copyright-protected materials. Accordingly, in most cases, permission from the copyright holder is necessary before a work can be lawfully copied and/or distributed. Because media monitoring services copy and distribute materials to a wide audience, for commercial use, they need a license from the copyright owner-publisher.

The consequences of copyright infringement can be severe, with fines reaching into six figures. For instance, the remedies under the U.S. Copyright Act that are available to publishers include statutory damages up to $150,000 per violation for willful violations and $30,000 per violation for non-willful violations, plus attorneys’ fees. Title 17 U.S.C. §§ 502-505. Courts have had little difficulty imposing these substantial fines on those who fail to abide by the copyright law. For example, see Lowry’s Report v. Legg Mason, 302 F.Supp.2d 455 (D. Md. 2004) or Graham v. Haughey, et al., No. 05-612 (E.D. Penn., April 2, 2008), in which the courts ordered the defendants to pay close to $20 million each for internal copying of copyrighted content.

In addition to potential liability for copyright infringement, media monitoring services also run the risk of violating other federal and state laws, such as trademark and unfair competition laws and hot news misappropriation laws.

The publishers of text content that SIIA represents are more interested in making sure that you know that there are convenient ways to comply, than they are interested in pursuing litigation against infringers.

For many organizations, the most convenient way to request permission to copy and distribute text materials is through the publisher of the content. For example, you can often obtain permission from the publisher directly from the publication’s website or by contacting the publisher directly. (In certain circumstances, you can also look for point-of content licensing features on individual online articles, such as Copyright Clearance Center’s Rightslink at www.rightslink.copyright.com or iCopyright at www.icopyright.com.)

Alternatively, to secure permissions from multiple copyright holders in one place, you may prefer to use the clearinghouse services of Copyright Clearance Center, available at www.copyright.com, or iCopyright at www.icopyright.com.

A third alternative is to alter your business model by sending your clients links to the original article, rather than making copies and sending them to your clients. Sending links to the articles, as opposed to the articles themselves, typically does not implicate the reproduction or distribution rights under the copyright law and therefore you do not need a license to do it.

We encourage you and your company to: (1) get further educated on the requirements of copyright law; (2) to investigate your company’s internal business practices; and (3) correct any areas of noncompliance with the copyright law. Additional information on the copyright law and the licensing of copyrighted works is also available at SIIA’s website, at www.siia.net, and the U.S. Copyright office, at www.copyright.gov, or by taking SIIA’s Certified Content Rights Manager course (http://www.siia.net/piracy/seminars.asp#ccrm).

Ultimately SIIA and its publishing members are interested in helping your business succeed and enabling your company to copy and distribute copyrighted materials lawfully. Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions about this letter or need assistance with your compliance efforts.

Sincerely,

Keith Kupferschmid
Senior Vice President, Intellectual Property Policy & Enforcement
Software & Information Industry Association

iCopyright for Creators!!!

Are you an artist? Photographer? Writer? Then if you have heard of iCopyright for Creators, you're probably already signed up. If you haven't heard of it, it may be just what you're looking for!

In this day and age, it's quite startling how many people copy and paste another's work. That could be happening to your work! You worked hard on it, you created it, it's yours, so you should get the benefits of it! With iCopyright for Creators, your work will be tagged online. This will allow you to assign a variety of different licensing options to your work. You can allow free uses such as a limited amount of free printings, or paid licenses such as purchased copies, or reprint rights or other services such as contacting you, the artist. All of these options are controlled by you. Allow some or all, it's your choice. You get complete control of options and pricing of your licenses. More importantly, the tag will allow the copyright information to be attached to the work letting customers know who owns the copyright - namely you!

iCopyright for Creators is free so sign up at http://creators.icopyright.com.

Your work should speak for itself - so let it!

Cut, Copy, Paste Kills Copyright (for now)

I am often asked by publishers, "Who is iCopyright's biggest competitor?" The answer is not usually obvious and takes them by surprise: "Cut, Copy and Paste!" It has 90% of the available market. That's right. The most generous estimates are that less than 10% of the content that is emailed, copied, posted, republished, or otherwise repurposed for commercial and educational purposes (as opposed to personal use), is done so with a valid license. Contrary to what content owners think, iCopyright does not compete with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC), Mochilla, Voxant, Macrovision, Attributor, or any of the other content licensing or syndication solutions on the market. Collectively, these solutions have less than 10% of the market...mere scraps.

iCopyright competes against a culture that tolerates (and even encourages) people to take other people's content with impunity. One might ask, "How can iCopyright possibly compete with that?" That's a longer and more complicated answer, best saved for another blog.

Here's a hint: In the 1980's and early 1990's, 80% of all software was copied and distributed freely without a license, in violation of the publisher's copyrights. Today, only about 10% of software is pirated -- mostly in countries with weak copyright education and enforcement. The vast majority of software is legally licensed. The tide did turn for software and will eventually do so for digital content. Cut, Copy, Paste may be killing copyright today, but in the long run, copyright will prevail. iCopyright is helping to lead the way.

iCopyright Provides Article Tools for Associated Press and its Members

We are pleased to report that iCopyright has entered into a digital content copyright protection and permission agreement with The Associated Press, providing online users of AP content with a Web-based method to license and share AP stories and photos for a variety of commercial and educational uses. AP will display iCopyright links at the top and bottom of every AP-hosted story so users can easily use, share and license content instantly. AP will encourage members/subscribers to add the iCopyright tags to the AP stories they publish on their own websites. AP shares the advertsing, reprint and licensing revenue with the member.

Bruce Glover, AP Deputy Director of Business Development: "This online content reuse arrangement opens up a new source of revenue from rights, permissions and reprints of AP content while enhancing copyright protection and licensing. iCopyright makes it easier to monitor copyright compliance and to identify pirated and misappropriated stories."

We could not be more pleased and honored to be named the exclusive licensing agent for AP’s hosted content. Online users will be able to click the Email Print Post Save License links at the top of AP stories to easily use and share the stories, while respecting AP's copyrights. By encouraging all of its members to also add the iCopyright tags, AP is helping to set a standard that the entire digital content industry can emulate.

What does it mean to websites that publish AP stories and photos each day?

Toby Leith, Boston Globe Content Licensing Manager: "We are very pleased to be one of the first news organizations already using iCopyright services to leverage this exciting development. For years, our customers have sought to create reprints based on AP content but with the Globe's logos and masthead for local use. Now, through iCopyright, they have a variety of service options to do just that."

Jack Lail, Managing Editor/Multimedia for The Knoxville News Sentinel: “iCopyright is a hassle-free way of handling reprints. The customer gets instantaneous fulfillment. Everybody wins.”

If you have any questions about how this works or what it means to those who publish and read AP stories, please shoot us an email at publishers@icopyright.com.

Nexpo and EContent April 12-15

Executives from iCopyright will be attending the Nexpo show in Washington D.C. and the EContent Show in Scottsdale, AZ on April 12-15, 2008. If you plan to attend either of these conferences and want to touch base, please drop us a note to arrange a meeting. publishers@icopyright.com.

For the Record: PARS Doesn't "Get It"

iCopyright is proud to have strong partnerships with a number of leading reprint companies, including FosteReprints, Wrights Reprints, The Reprint Licensing Centre, and Red Rover. We operate an "open platform" that these reprint companies can use to better serve their publisher clients and the companies that buy reprints. Many publishers that manage reprints internally also use iCopyright to generate more reprint sales. In fact, just about every reprint company and every publisher reprint department that has taken the time to test iCopyright, has adopted it. We are happy to supply references to anyone who wants them.

We appreciate that not every reprint company wants to partner with iCopyright. What we don't appreciate are false or misleading reasons a reprint company gives a publisher client for not wanting to partner with iCopyright. We believe they have a responsibility to their clients to be honest about the pros and cons. On that note, we wish to set the record straight with one such reprint company.

We recently came into possession of a memo written by Steve Mussman of PARS (Publisher Ancillary Revenue Services) to one of his publisher clients, regarding iCopyright. The memo contained so many false and misleading statements, it was obvious to us that PARS does not understand the iCopyright technology and the role it plays for reprint companies and publishers. Either that, or Mr. Mussman has some personal grudge to bare. We take great pride in iCopyright, so we think it is only appropriate that we set the record straight.

Mussman: iCopyright has "failed to gain significant traction in the marketplace."

The truth is that iCopyright has been more widely deployed by publishers than any other solution and certainly has far more publication clients than does PARS.

Mussman: "...the most prevalent comment about the performance of [iCopyright] is the COMPLETE LACK OF REVENUE GENERATION!"

The truth is that iCopyright is not used exclusively by publishers to generate revenue. It is used to communicate and preserve the publisher's rights, provide for the "free use" of the publisher's content, generate valuable data on how the publisher's content is being used and by whom, among many other purposes. Mr. Mussman makes this statement as if every one of his clients generates a lot of revenue. The fact is they do not. PARS can not control any more than iCopyright can whether the content has "resale" value or whether anyone wants to buy it.

Mussman: "Several publishers have even gone so far as to remove the option from their website(s) because the administrative effort was not being offset by the revenue it was generating."

The truth is that iCopyright requires no administrative effort. Once the publisher adds the iCopyright tags to their CMS, the automated system does the work -- including sending leads for reprints to the publisher's reprint company or internal staff. While many publishers choose to use their iCopyright Console to modify prices, add new licensing services, run reports and the like, there is no requirement to do so. While it is true that a few publishers have ceased using iCopyright, the number is no doubt far less than the number of publishers who once used PARS, but now use another reprint company or handle reprints internally.

Mussman: "It is obvious to us that both systems [he is speaking of iCopyright and Rightslink] are trying to garner (aggregate) as much content as possible for their own enrichment."

The truth is that iCopyright takes a far less percentage for its services than does PARS. The value iCopyright provides is indisputable, which is why so many publishers and reprint companies use it. Mr. Mussman makes this statement as if he is not in business to "enrich" himself.

Mussman: "Our point was that the amount of permission requests received would almost certainly not increase due to the incorporation of [iCopyright]."

The truth is that most publishers who have implemented iCopyright have experienced a significant increase in the number of permission requests. The reason is simple: permissions are available instantly at the user's first point of contact with the article. The user just has to click to buy an instant license or to order reprints. To get reprints from PARS, a user must wait for someone from PARS to call. That simply does not scale. In fact, there is no way for PARS to know who to call. They don't know who is reading an article at any one moment and might be interested in buying it. iCopyright knows that and can immediately engage the reader and facilitate a reprint order.

Mussman: "We have also discovered first hand that by incorporating such a service that many publishers have in-fact seen adverse effects on the amount of leads and revenue generated by their CORE reprint program(s)."

This is a patently false statement and shows how ignorant Mr. Mussman is about the role that iCopyright plays. Mr. Mussman is under the mistaken belief that every person who might be interested in using the article, wants custom reprints and has several thousand dollars to spend. There are all kinds of things that people want to do with a piece besides reprint it. In fact, iCopyright offers 20 different types of licenses. The reprint companies that iCopyright works with will testify that iCopyright has generated reprint leads for them that they would not have received otherwise, and does provide a mechanism for people who initially express interest in purchasing a lower-priced license to upgrade to custom reprints.

Mussman: "We have been and continue to be concerned that these programs offer users a significantly lower priced alternative upfront!"

On that score, Mr. Mussman has it exactly right. iCopyright does indeed offer users lower priced alternatives for the reuse of the publisher's content. Mr Mussman simply fails to understand that the vast majority of these people are not in the market for expensive reprints to begin with. Best that the publisher offers them affordable options to generate some revenue, rather than no revenue, and discourages these people from cutting and pasting the content without permission -- which is what many do when no alternatives are available.

Mussman: "Many times when a user requests a product or service they do so without knowing the full range of options available to them and therefore tend to choose the least expensive alternative."

The truth is that iCopyright is the ONLY system that offers users a full range of options -- over 20 instant licensing and custom licensing services. PARS offers a limited set of services, which are much more expensive, and typically require days if not weeks for the user to receive.

Mussman: "Our staff is trained to ask probing questions to determine the user’s true needs along with the size and scope of their budgets. This probing usually results in up-sell opportunities and/or cross sell opportunities that cannot be accomplished online by an automated system. "

Wrong again, Mr. Mussman. iCopyright is the only system that offers LIVE SUPPORT on every article. Users can chat with a licensing agent as they are reading the article to discuss their needs and their budget and be directed to the right service. If a user wants to speak with PARS, they first must find the phone number (unlike iCopyright, it is not posted on every article) and make a call.


iCopyright is a transparent system for automated permissions and reprint sales. We conduct our business the same way -- transparently and honestly. We trust PARS will do the same. We have even recommended PARS to publishers who were looking to hire a reprint company. We don't expect the same courtesy, but we do expect them not to misrepresent the facts.

Mike O'Donnell
Chief Executive Officer