“You belong with me,” said Spotify to Taylor…

Screen Shot 2014-11-28 at 3.11.13 PMBy Amy Wang

Taylor Swift recently announced her highly publicized breakup with Spotify, the popular music-streaming platform. Not only has Swift denied Spotify streaming access to her new album, 1989, but she has also removed all her past albums from Spotify’s catalogue as well, leaving a Blank Space on over 19 million Spotify playlists. The reason?

Swift justified her actions by explaining that she doesn’t feel Spotify “fairly compensates the writers, producers, artists and creators of this music.” To that point, Spotify agrees that artists deserve recognition of their hard work. The company claims that it paid out $2 million to Swift in royalties for the past year and projects that Swift, as one of the most popular musicians in the world today, could earn over $6 million from Spotify alone. On the contrary, Scott Borchetta, CEO of Swift’s label Big Machine, claims that Swift earned less than $500,000 from Spotify streams in the U.S. for the past year. Continue reading

New “Serial” Podcast Promotes Public Knowledge of Failing Criminal Justice System

Screen Shot 2014-11-25 at 5.04.08 PMBy Rachael Wallace

With download of This American Life’s spinoff podcast “Serial” hitting 5 million downloads this week, an old murder case is being cast in a new light—at least to those uninvolved with the criminal justice system. Podcasts have never been a particularly effective source of journalism, and many have expressed surprise over the popularity of “Serial.” Some have speculated that the murder mystery draws people in the same way fictional television shows do — with endings that leave those listening yearning for more. Though Serial may be good news for the podcast industry and investigative journalism, it may be even better for the criminal justice system.

Serial follows the murder of Hae Min Lee, the timeline and relationships between those involved, and the legal proceedings against her ex-boyfriend Adnan Syed. But unlike many popular crime dramas, Hae Min Lee’s story is real. And while millions of listeners are enthralled by her story and the complicated legal details of Adnan Syed’s conviction, the reality remains that Serial follows what prosecutors, police, or defense attorneys would consider a completely ordinary, perfectly typical criminal case in the United States. Essentially, Serial presents both a disturbing picture of the criminal justice system and an opportunity for the public—those not affiliated with the legal system in a professional capacity—to learn about substantive and procedural obstacles that people face when entered into the criminal justice system. Continue reading

AT&T Stops Using Controversial Tracking Codes but Smartphone Carriers Aren’t Done Yet

Screen Shot 2014-11-21 at 9.39.40 AMBy Julie Liu

Several weeks ago, researchers made the disturbing discovery that smartphone carriers AT&T and Verizon have been using hidden codes to track users’ network activity. AT&T has since put this practice on hold, but Verizon does not apparently plan to follow suit.

Use of tracking technology is not itself a new phenomenon. Location tracking, which allows law enforcement agencies to collect information about individuals, has been around for a while. Similarly, Facebook, Google, and other large web companies that compile and sell user data to advertisers have long since adopted the practice of monitoring online activity. Verizon reportedly undertook the tracking program at issue in 2012, but it was not until late last month that this type of tracking activity by carriers received widespread attention.

As a means of collecting user data to offer to advertisers, AT&T and Verizon insert unique tracking codes into users’ Internet activity. The codes, which can be thought of as “supercookies,” operate as temporary IDs which are sent to every unencrypted website that a user visits from his or her mobile device. In this fashion, AT&T and Verizon can monitor each person’s app usage and site visits, which allows advertisers to better tailor ads to individuals. The practice essentially creates a permanent and highly personalized profile for each user. Continue reading

#transparency: Twitter Sues U.S. Government Over Secret Surveillance

Image credit: http://tmmpdx.com

Image credit: http://tmmpdx.com

By Craig Henson

On October 7, 2014, social media heavyweight Twitter filed a lawsuit against the federal government seeking the right to publicly disclose data related to secret government surveillance of its users. The company filed the complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, naming as defendants U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, the Department of Justice, the FBI, and FBI director James Comey. In the complaint, Twitter alleged that the government impermissibly infringes on Twitter’s First Amendment rights by prohibiting Twitter from disclosing information about the number and type of surveillance requests and orders received, even if that number is zero.

Section 2709 of the Stored Communications Act (SCA) permits the FBI to issue national security letters (NSLs) that require a wire or electronic communication service provider to supply the government with subscriber information, toll billing records information, or electronic communication transactional records. The SCA prohibits NSL recipients from disclosing that the FBI either sought or obtained the requested information or records. Similarly, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) permits the government to obtain a court order authorizing real-time surveillance or disclosure of stored records from an electronic communication service provider. Numerous authorities prohibit a FISA order recipient from disclosing information about that order, including 50 U.S.C. § 1805 of FISA as well as court-imposed nondisclosure requirements in the FISA orders themselves. Continue reading

Comic Book Conundrum: Who Owns the Copyrights to the World’s Most Valuable Entertainment?

Screen Shot 2014-11-17 at 4.03.04 PMBy Chris Ferrell

Comic book characters are more famous now (and more valuable) than they have ever been. For example, Marvel Studio’s “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” grossed over $714 million worldwide. When Marvel launched its “Phase 3” platform of movies (extending “Marvel Universe” through 2020), the Internet exploded with social media craze. Just mentioning Marvel Studio’s slate of movies isn’t enough: this infographic shows every announced comic book movie for all major movie studios through 2020. Some of the comic characters in these billion-dollar movie ideas were originally created over seventy-five years ago and for an entirely different medium: comic strips. When these characters were first created, no one had any idea that they would one day gross billions of dollars, causing legal battles to rage for the copyrights of these characters.

One of the most important copyright legal battles has raged for nearly six decades over one of the most iconic characters of all time: Superman. Around 1938, the creators, Joseph Shuster and Jerry Siegel, sold their rights to the Superman storyline to DC Comics for $130.00 and additional, annual “work for hire” payments for supplying material to DC Comics. Once the character became widely popular, the creators tried to get their rights back. While the creators have since passed on, their estates have found a new means to attack the copyrights of the work: the 1976 Copyright Act’s termination provisions. Continue reading