• anonymous copyright infringer

    don’t sue

  • http://gnuosphere.blogspot.com Peter Rock

    For the rest of us, this is feeling one gets when someone says – “I have something I want to tell you but I’m not sure I should.” And then decides not to. :)

  • Sandon Tuppenhut

    It’s mysterious! It’s mysterious!

  • http://mayin.org/aragorn/index.html Vikram

    Now all we have to do is find Copyright angel’s blog. sigh.

  • http://beyondtheobvious.org Andrew

    Has Lessig found a loophole?

  • http://www.robmyers.org/ Rob Myers

    In what? :-)

  • http://beyondtheobvious.org Andrew

    I’d guess in Sonny Bono

  • http://mayamoose.blogspot.com maya

    yes please post a link to the angel – egad!

  • copyright angel

    You’re welcome.

  • copyright angel

    No, forget it — I take it back.

  • Branko Collin

    Dear mr. Lessig,

    Please look into the medium also know as “e-mail”.

    With kind regards,

  • Brian

    I would guess someone offered to donate a significant sum to Creative Commons but on the condition that they enter into some sort of joint venture with CC or on some sort of condition that needs looking at carefully. In the investment community “Angel” investors are big investors that fund (typically) start-up companies. Just my guess.

  • copyright angel

    You fools! You understand nothing!

  • Ryan

    Like the rest of you, I’m somewhat baffled by this post.

  • Lone Gunman #4

    Wait, wait. LL didn’t use any caps in his reply, that “must” mean something! It is a code of some sort.

    If we take the position of the grassy knoll and divide it by the number of letters in the reply, times the square root of the vowels in ‘copyright angel’ and then factor in the date “Nov 30′ on the Mayan* calendar I think we can all see that the answer reveals Lessig’s “real” first name.

    Well played chap, nicely done!

    *Yes, the Mayan calendar you fool, NOT the Incan one.

  • Mickey

    Don’t believe that top-secret internal memo, Larry! The Walt Disney Company DID NOT actually forget to renew my copyright, and there has not been a massive cover-up for all these years.

  • Mr Eye

    “Mickey” your joke probably has nothing to do with the truth of Lessigs “angel” blog entry, but that doesn’t mean it’might not be true…,

    “Commentary on Copyright Extension
    Mickey Mouse — A Truly Public Character

    by Lauren Vanpelt
    Arizona State University College of Law
    Student Paper in Advanced Copyright, Spring 1999

    Mickey Mouse — A Truly Public Character

    By Lauren Vanpelt, Spring 1999

    “Disney’s copyrighted character Mickey Mouse is perhaps the most universally known and loved cartoon character in the world. For generations, children and adults alikehave been entertained by Mickey Mouse, who has appeared in hundreds of Disneyanimated motion pictures, television shows, video cassettes, comics, books, and in various other media. Indeed, the Mickey Mouse character identifies and symbolizes Disney itself.” Waft Disney Company v. Transatlantic Video Inc., U.S.D.C., Central District of Ca., Case No. CV-91-0429 (1991). This is how Disney described its star, Mickey Mouse, in a copyright infringement case pleading. Can there be any argument on this point?

    Who has never heard of Mickey Mouse? His friendly and familiar image has invaded even the remotest regions of our world. And just as familiar is Mickey Mouse’s creator and parent company – Disney. Rarely has a twosome like Disney and Mickey Mouse been able to achieve fame and recognition on such a large scale. But does Mickey Mouse really belong to Disney? Wait Disney most certainly created the character, but did Disney forfeit its copyright ownership of Mickey Mouse?

    An examination of Mickey Mouse’s history clearly demonstrates that the copyright in Mickey Mouse undeniably belongs to the public. Disney created the image, but subsequently failed to properly manage its copyright in Mickey Mouse, thereby forfeiting it. The copyright in Mickey Mouse belongs to every adult who has ever smiled at a cartoon Mickey Mouse, and to every child who has cried when a six foot Mickey Mouse bent over to give mom and dad that photo opportunity. “

    http://www.public.asu.edu/~dkarjala/publicdomain/Vanpelt-s99.html

  • http://www.newponyrecords.org/ Copyright Angel?

    We sent Professor Lessig an email asking for his comment on our website:

    http://www.newponyrecords.org/

    a few days before he posted this cryptic message. Of course, he may well have another email message in mind, but our website may fit the bill as a direct action campaign to liberalize copyright. Here’s our press release announcing the launch:

    Bob Dylan Receives A “Friendly Shove” From Fans

    A group of Bob Dylan bootleg fans are trying to raise the heat on both Dylan and his label, Columbia, in an effort to bring the Dylan bootleg fan community in from the cold.

    In an unprecedented gesture, the group has launched a mock record label, New Pony Records (http://www.newponyrecords.org), to illustrate their argument for an alternative market-based solution to the burgeoning gray market in unauthorized Dylan concert recordings. The website presents a catalog of “releases,” sample liner notes, and (until asked to desist by Dylan’s manager Jeff Rosen) one minute audio samples of selected performances. The site’s “frequently asked questions” section articulates the group’s mission as it argues for copyright liberalization which better balances the copyright holder’s right to royalty income and the public’s interest in expanded access to unauthorized recordings.

    New Pony Records proposes to license the recordings from Dylan and Columbia Records, offering them in CD-format available only through web-based mail order. New Pony itself would be operated as a non-profit corporation led by a ten-member Board of Advisors consisting of noted Dylan authorities drawn from the fan community. It’s a matter of common sense, according to New Pony Records General Manager Watt Alexander. “Bob Dylan plays concerts. People pay to hear these concerts. Members of the audience, illegally, tape these concerts. People are willing to pay to hear these recordings. They circulate now and they’ll circulate, one way or another, as long as there are Dylan fans. Why not acknowledge demand and meet the fans halfway, giving fans expanded access to music they crave while establishing a revenue channel which formalizes the copyright holder’s right to royalties on the recordings which circulate?”

    The website is also an attempt to interject a fan sensibility into the copyright debate, says Alexander. “The industry rush to consolidate copyright protection for this music has largely ignored fan interests. If you look back, most significant advances within the industry have come in reaction to fan innovation. That innovation has been driven by fan demand for more music in more formats than the industry itself has deemed worth offering. History suggests the industry responds to these innovations by wielding a legal sledgehammer, attempting to crush the pioneers, only to find the offending practice has become so widespread that the industry itself must adapt.”

    New Pony Records is an attempt to speed up this evolutionary cycle and, Alexander believes, Dylan and Columbia are prime candidates the lead the way. “Dylan’s management has exhibited an enlightened approach to unauthorized recordings over the years. Beginning with the “Basement Tapes” through the recent “Bootleg Series” releases, they’ve done a great job cherry picking among the most popular bootleg titles and bringing them to a wider audience. But the mass market approach taken with these releases can’t match the huge catalog of recordings which circulate within the gray market. While we applaud their efforts, we think they need a nudge to expand availability through other channels which don’t interfere with their official catalog. New Pony Records is a friendly nudge, or maybe a shove, to do just that.”

    Nonetheless, the group behind New Pony Records doesn’t expect Dylan’s management to welcome the gesture. “They’ll do their best to ignore us, hoping we’ll get tired and go away,” Alexander predicts. “There may be other formats or approaches which suit Dylan and Columbia better. We’re not saying New Pony is the only way to do this, or even the best way. We are simply saying the status quo which limits public access to great music, turns fans into outlaws to hear it, and deprives Dylan royalty payments is absurd. Here’s an example where copyright law has been carried to an illogical extreme. It’s only within the castle walls of copyright protection that such a vision makes sense; that fan demand is viewed as unwelcome and free market solutions are considered a threat.”

    “Whatever one may say about Dylan’s formidable talents and the value of these performances, when push comes to shove, we’re talking about the music business here.” Alexander said, adding, “However mistreated we may feel as fans, as consumers we aren’t powerless. The music is out there and the motivated will find ways to get it simply because, ultimately, they’re more motivated than the industry enforcers can ever hope to be. The rest of us have the collective purchasing power to motivate suppliers, whether official or illicit, to give us access. In that sense, New Pony Records is a vehicle to enunciate fan demand and help persuade Dylan’s management to trust the fans to show them the market.”

    I’d welcome comments at our email address noise@newponyrecords.org — Thanks