TIME Germany

Hitler’s Mein Kampf Will Be Reprinted in Germany for the First Time Since World War II

The new edition will be presented as a historical document and heavily annotated with analysis and criticism

Reprints of Adolf Hitler’s autobiography Mein Kampf will be hitting bookstores across Germany once more — the first time since the Nazi leader’s death.

A ban on reprinting the Nazi manifesto in the country has been in place since the end of World War II. The state of Bavaria has held the German copyright ever since but it expires in December, reports the Washington Post.

The new edition, which is being produced and published by the taxpayer-funded Institute of Contemporary History, will be a heavily annotated 2,000-page volume that features mostly criticism and analysis.

The institute says Mein Kampf (My Struggle) is an important historical and educational tool.

But opponents, including many Holocaust survivors, are outraged with the reissue, with many seeing it as giving a fresh voice to a ruthless and deranged dictator who was responsible for the deaths of more than 11 million people.

“This book is most evil; it is the worst anti-Semitic pamphlet and a guidebook for the Holocaust,” said Charlotte Knobloch, head of the Jewish community in Munich.

Though republication of Mein Kampf has been banned in Germany, the book is widely available online and in many other countries including the U.S. and Canada.

The first print run is due out early next year.

Read next: The ‘Death Penalty’ and How the College Sports Conversation Has Changed

Listen to the most important stories of the day.

TIME trademarks

Why Taylor Swift Is Going to War With Twee Retailer Etsy

Musician Taylor Swift
Michael Stewart—WireImage Taylor Swift has also trademarked our hearts.

She's not gonna shake off trademark violations

The Taylor Swift trademark crackdown continues. The pop star has singled out Etsy sellers hawking wares featuring her likeness and sent them cease-and-desist letters, according to BuzzFeed. Several Swift-themed items, including candles adorned with lyrics from her hit “Blank Space” and mugs that mimic the album art for 1989 are no longer available on the site. One Etsy seller told BuzzFeed that she was “shocked” to receive a cease-and-desist letter from Swift’s rights management company and said she was making her items for fun, not for profit. Etsy’s policies ban products that violate trademarks or copyrights.

Earlier this year Swift applied to trademark several phrases from 1989, including “this sick beat” and “party like it’s 1989.” One musician wrote a metal song titled “This Sick Beat” in protest.

[BuzzFeed]

TIME Music

Tom Petty Has No Hard Feelings About Sam Smith Song

Tom Petty And The Heartbreakers Performs At The Forum
Paul R. Giunta—Getty Images Tom Petty of Tom Petty And The Heartbreakers performs onstage at The Forum on October 10, 2014 in Inglewood, California.

"Sam did the right thing and I have thought no more about this.”

Tom Petty says there is no ill will between him and Sam Smith after the artists reached an agreement announced this week over similarities between a song of his and Smith’s recent hit, Stay With Me.

A representative for Sam Smith announced on Monday that Tom Petty and his co-writer Jeff Lynne would be credited as co-writers on Smith’s song because of similarities between it and Petty’s 1989 hit I Won’t Back Down.

“Not previously familiar with the 1989 Petty/Lynne song, the writers of “Stay With Me” listened to “I Won’t Back Down” and acknowledged the similarity,” the representative said in a statement. “Although the likeness was a complete coincidence, all involved came to an immediate and amicable agreement in which Tom Petty and Jeff Lynne are now credited as co-writers of “Stay With Me” along with Sam Smith, James Napier and William Phillips.”

Now Petty has confirmed that the two artists have reconciled their differences amicably. “Sam did the right thing and I have thought no more about this,” Petty said in a post to his website. “A musical accident no more no less.”

Here’s the full statement:

“About the Sam Smith thing. Let me say I have never had any hard feelings toward Sam. All my years of songwriting have shown me these things can happen. Most times you catch it before it gets out the studio door but in this case it got by. Sam’s people were very understanding of our predicament and we easily came to an agreement. The word lawsuit was never even said and was never my intention. And no more was to be said about it. How it got out to the press is beyond Sam or myself. Sam did the right thing and I have thought no more about this. A musical accident no more no less. In these times we live in this is hardly news. I wish Sam all the best for his ongoing career. Peace and love to all.”

 

Here are the two songs, for you to compare:

 

 

 

TIME Music

Universal Sues Companies That Sell Mixtapes for Prisoners

Claims selling the mixtapes, which include artists like Steve Wonder, Eminem and the Jackson Five, is copyright infringement

Universal Music Group has filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against a group of companies their lawyers suspect of distributing unauthorized mixtapes to prisoners.

The companies, including the Centric group and Keefe group, are accused of selling “care packages” for families to send their incarcerated loved ones that contain mixes of songs by artists like Steve Wonder, Eminem, LL Cool J, James Brown, and the Jackson Five.

“The ‘mixtape’ label is frequently a cover for piracy,” Universal said in the lawsuit, adding, “the infringing copies of Plaintiffs’ sound recordings and musical compositions, in which Defendants unlawfully transact and from which they unjustly profit, are contraband personified.”

Universal is demanding the maximum statutory damages of $150,000 for each copyrighted work infringed. Keefe and Centric group have not yet made public comment.

[h/t The Hollywood Reporter]

TIME Music

Judge Rules That Shakira’s Hit Song ‘Loca’ Broke Copyright Laws

Eduardo Nicolau/Estadao Conteudo—Agencia Estado/AP Colombian singer Shakira smiles during the closing ceremony of the 2014 Fifa World Cup, before the final match between Germany and Argentina, at Maracana Stadium, in Rio de Janeiro, southeastern Brazil, on July 13, 2014.

Damages have yet to be fixed

A federal judge in New York has found that the Spanish-language version of Shakira’s hit song ‘Loca’ breaks copyright laws.

The song, which has sold millions of copies since its 2010 release, was found to indirectly infringe on a song by Dominican singer Roman Arias Vazquez, the BBC reports.

Judge Alvin Hellerstein ruled Tuesday that ‘Loca’ was based on a song by Dominican rapper El Cata, which in turn resembled Vazquez’s 1990s song ‘Loca con su Tiguere.’

El Cata, whose real name is Eduard Edwin Bello Pou, denies the resemblance, the BBC says.

Damages for the plaintiff, Mayimba Music, haven’t yet been determined.

The English version of ‘Loca’ was “not offered into evidence” at the trial.

[BBC]

TIME movies

Zero Theorem Director Terry Gilliam Is Being Sued Over a Mural

Celebrity Sightings In London -  June 1, 2014
Simon James/GC Images Terry Gilliam sighted arriving at BBC studios on June 1, 2014 in London, England.

Plaintiffs say he used their work without permission

Three prominent graffiti artists, whose work is well known in Argentina, are suing director Terry Gilliam for copyright infringement, according to the Hollywood Reporter.

The plaintiffs, Argentines Franco Fasoli (also known as Jaz) and Nicolas Romero (who works under the name Ever), as well as Derek Mehaffey of Canada (who operates under the pseudonyms of Troy Lovegates and Other) claim their rights to a mural collaboration have been violated in Gilliam’s forthcoming movie The Zero Theorem.

The mural, known as Castillo, was completed in 2010 in Buenos Aires’ famous zona de graffiti — an area known for its street art. The artists say they later had the mural copyrighted in Argentina in 2013.

“The Copyrighted Artwork has achieved international recognition in the art world, and is widely recognized by the public in Argentina and abroad. Castillo is so important that it is one of the few public artworks that have survived for years in that particular zona de graffiti,” says the lawsuit.

Gilliam’s The Zero Theorem — which stars Matt Damon, Tilda Swinton and Chistoph Waltz — was shot primarily in Bucharest, Romania, but the artists claim that an exterior shot of a chapel “features a colorful mural that is a blatant misappropriation of Plaintiffs’ Copyrighted Artwork.”

Voltage Pictures and Amplify Releasing are also named as defendants.

The plaintiffs are seeking a “preliminary and permanent” injunction to the late-August video-on-demand release, and September 19 theatrical release, of The Zero Theorem, as well as statutory and punitive damages, profits, and costs for legal representation.

TIME Behind the Photos

Monkey Selfie Lands Photographer in Legal Quagmire

Copyright law can be obscure, but nothing could have prepared British photographer David Slater for what would happen after a monkey stole his camera in Indonesia to take a selfie.

The picture, which went viral three years ago, is today at the center of a heated copyright dispute between Slater and Wikipedia, the open-source encyclopedia. (See Quartz’s Zachary Seward: “Who owns this monkey’s selfie?”)

In 2011, nature photographer David Slater was on vacation in Indonesia when a group of monkeys started playing with equipment he had set up. “They were quite mischievous jumping all over my equipment, and it looked like they were already posing for the camera when one hit the button,” he told The Telegraph in 2011. “The sound got his attention and he kept pressing it. He must have taken hundreds of pictures by the time I got my camera back, but not very many were in focus. He obviously hadn’t worked that out yet.”

The image was an instant Internet phenomenon, guaranteeing financial success for the British photographer. That is until editors at Wikipedia deemed the image belonged in the public domain and could be used, at no cost, by anyone online. “This [image] is in the public domain, because as the work of a non-human animal, it has no human author in whom copyright is vested,” said Wikipedia’s group of editors.

With Slater now ready to go to court to assert his copyright, he is likely fighting a losing battle, legal experts say.

“That’s ridiculous,” says intellectual property expert Charles Swan of the London-based Swan Turton law firm of Slater’s claim that he holds a copyright on the photograph. “The legal situation as far as European copyright is concerned is that a photograph has to be the author’s own intellectual creation. If a monkey takes a picture, that can be considered an author’s intellectual creation. The fact that [David Slater] owns the camera has nothing to do with it. To have copyright, you’ve got to create something; it has to be an expression of your personality. That’s not. Obviously, [since the monkey is not a person] there is no copyright in that picture.”

Ellen DeGeneres shows actors, front row from left, Jared Leto, Jennifer Lawrence, Meryl Streep, Ellen DeGeneres, Bradley Cooper, Peter Nyong’o Jr.  Channing Tatum, Julia Roberts, Kevin Spacey, Brad Pitt, Lupita Nyong’o, Angelina Jolie
Ellen DeGeneres—APThis image released by Ellen DeGeneres shows actors, front row from left, Jared Leto, Jennifer Lawrence, Meryl Streep, Ellen DeGeneres, Bradley Cooper, Peter Nyong’o Jr. and, second row, from left, Channing Tatum, Julia Roberts, Kevin Spacey, Brad Pitt, Lupita Nyong’o and Angelina Jolie as they pose for a “selfie” portrait on a cell phone during the Oscars at the Dolby Theatre on Sunday, March 2, 2014, in Los Angeles.

Mary M. Luria, an intellectual property specialist and partner at Davis & Gilbert LLP in New York City, also sides with Wikipedia, noting the need for a “natural person” to exist for copyright to be claimed. In this case, a monkey, or any other animal, isn’t considered a living human being.

“These copyright debates come along regularly,” says Swan, who recalls legal experts debating ownership of Ellen DeGeneres’ popular star-studded selfie. While the daytime talk show host posted the image on her own Twitter account, actor Bradley Cooper pressed the shutter button.

“Any disagreements [over ownership] between Ellen DeGeneres and the photographer would be governed by any agreement they reached about the shoot,” Luria says. In the absence of such an agreement, the person that presses the shutter button would normally be considered the copyright owner of the resulting image.


Olivier Laurent is the editor of TIME LightBox. Follow him on Twitter and Instagram @olivierclaurent


TIME Books

Sherlock Holmes Still in Public Domain After Another Loss for Doyle Estate

Judge to Doyle estate: You're on thin ice

Attention, Sherlock Holmes fanfiction writers, you can still try and squeeze some money out of 221b Baker Street’s famous resident — the world of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s detective series remains in the public domain, despite repeated attempts from the late author’s estate to hold on to copyright claim.

7th Circuit Judge Richard Posner said the estate’s activities were basically “a form of extortion” in an Aug. 4 decision that sided with an editor seeking legal-fee reimbursement from the estate, Gawker Media blog i09 reports.

Last year, editor Leslie Klinger took the estate to court after it tried to block publication of a new anthology series unless it was paid a licensing fee. After a judge ruled that all stories published before 1923 were in the public domain, the estate made an appeal that was rejected by Posner, who noted that the estate was asking for 135 years of copyright protection and could be in violation of anti-trust laws.

“The Doyle estate’s business strategy is plain: charge a modest license fee for which there is no legal basis, in the hope that the ‘rational’ writer or publisher asked for the fee will pay it rather than incur a greater cost, in legal expenses, in challenging the legality of the demand,” Klinger wrote in his decision supporting Kinger’s request for reimbursement, which he called “a public service.”

TIME Aereo

Aereo to Court: We’re ‘Bleeding to Death’

A month after the Supreme Court ruled that the TV-streaming service was operating illegally, the cash-strapped startup has requested an emergency ruling that will enable it to start earning revenue again

Facing a dire financial situation, the TV-streaming service Aereo Inc. asked a federal court in Manhattan for an emergency ruling on its application to operate as a cable TV service, a move that would allow the company to begin earning revenue for the first time since it stopped operations June 28.

The TV-streaming startup said it is “figuratively bleeding to death,” as it has not made money since it stopped operating after the Supreme Court ruled its services were in violation of copyright law last month.

“Unless it is able to resume operations in the immediate future, the company will likely not survive,” said Aereo in a federal court filing.

A federal judge in Manhattan declined to make a decision on the application Friday, saying the company “jumped the gun” in making the request without permission.

A Supreme Court ruling in June found that the company’s antenna-based transmission of live and recorded broadcast programming was a violation of U.S. copyright law. In response, Aereo began to argue that it was a cable company, the very sort of company it was hoping to replace. But Aereo cannot operate as a cable company without a license to do so from the U.S. Copyright Office, which has said it will not issue a license until the courts determine the company’s status.

[Bloomberg]

TIME Copyright

Seth McFarlane Accused of Stealing Ted Character

"A Million Ways To Die In The West" Photocall
Karwai Tang—WireImage Seth MacFarlane attends a photocall to promote "A Million Ways To Die In The West" held at Claridges Hotel on May 27, 2014 in London, England.

Another production company has accused the funnyman of ripping off their character

A California-based production company filed a lawsuit against Seth MacFarlane Tuesday accusing the comedian and filmmaker of stealing the vulgar, womanizing teddy bear character used in the movie Ted.

According to the complaint, filed by Bengal Mangle Productions, Ted‘s lead character is similar to one in the screenplay for the web series Acting School Academy, which was written in 2008.

“The screenplay included a character named Charlie (“Charlie”),” the suit says. “Charlie is a teddy bear who lives in a human, adult world with all human friends. Charlie has a penchant for drinking, smoking, prostitutes, and is a generally vulgar yet humorous character. “

The plaintiffs claim Acting School Academy was circulated on YouTube, Facebook, iTunes, Funny or Die, Vimeo and other forums and viewed around 1.2 million times.

Universal released the movie Ted, created by McFarlane, in June 2012. According to The Hollywood Reporter, Ted was the highest-grossing R-rated comedy of the year, raking in $550 million.

The suit alleges copyright infringement and seeks recovery of unspecified damages. Neither McFarlane nor Universal responded to a request for comment from THR.

[THR]

Your browser is out of date. Please update your browser at http://update.microsoft.com