Copyrights Might Kill Our Hockey Song

The CBC has decided not to renew its contract with the composer of the Hockey Night in Canada theme song. All across Canada, hockey fans are bowing their heads and pumping their fists in anger. To many, it's almost like saying that the country is going to replace its National Anthem. So why the reason behind the decision?

Many reports state that the network has simply decided to "move in a new direction". But others have dug up information about a lawsuit the composer filed against CBC based on the unauthorized use of the tune beyond the scope of the original license agreement. Reportedly, CBC has license to use the song, composed by Dolores Claman in 1968 and used in partnership with the sport since then, in all Hockey Night in Canada broadcasts in Canada. So when the network decided to use it in the UK, and in "various other productions", Claman cried violation.

In an age where music composers are trying desperately to get their creations heard and recognized, isn't this situation slightly insulting? What has music come to when an inspirational tune that has brought joy to millions of Canadian citizens for 40 years could be lost because the creator did not get every penny of her $500/air play agreement? We'd be naive to think that money isn't a motivator (and a necessity) in music: one needs to be compensated in order to have the means to keep the creative juices flowing. But after 40 years, one could argue that the copyright for that song belongs to Canada, not to Claman. You'd hope she'd be proud of this, but apparently not so, seeking $2.5 million in "damages".

But on the flip side, if CBC's decision to squash the tune is in direct response of her actions (the new license deal supposedly included the exact same terms as always, with no increase in price or difference in usage rights), then they aren't any better than Claman. Granted, $2.5 million is a large sum, not to mention legal fees if the network fights the suit. But is the money worth it to keep Canadian viewers happy?

It's clear that issues of copyright and DRM as a whole aren't helping foster creativity nor secure the rights of music owners. It's just, more and more, being used as a means to grab money from individuals and companies. Meanwhile, we have struggling artists giving their music away online who would kill for the kind of positive association that this theme song has (or perhaps had?) If only music were still about bringing joy to people and not cashing in every way one can...

Students File Suit Claiming Facebook Founder Stole Their Idea

I’ve covered the topic of social networking several times over the course of the past few months, but it’s such a popular topic lately that I can't seem to go one day without seeing a hot new story all over the media about it. Recently, it's all about popular Website Facebook. And this week’s hot news follows the standard path that most successful new start-ups end up walking down: the lawsuit. Three college students have filed a lawsuit against 23-year old Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg, claiming that he stole their idea. When one reaches the top, rest assured that people will try to cash in on your fame. It’s a classic "kick 'em when he's up" scenario.

The lawsuit alleges that the three men in question concocted the idea for a site, and had originally called it ConnectU, with the idea that it would help connect Harvard students. Zuckerberg was brought on for the technical aspects: these guys were athletes, not tech geeks. The three allege that Zuckerberg eventually stopped working on the site while he went ahead with his own site that followed the same premise.

If Zuckerberg was the one who was able to take the idea and run, he deserves the credit. But in all fairness, if he stole someone else's idea, well, that's just wrong.

The students filed a suit against Zuckerberg and Facebook in 2004 that was quickly dismissed. As Facebook grew in popularity (it currently claims over 30 million active members!), the three men became more red-faced, and finally filed again in March 2007. A hearing today will determine whether this suit will proceed, or be dismissed yet again. Stay tuned!

As a sidenote, it's funny (but increasingly common) that a small, college project has evolved into a company that could soon file for an IPO, and might just be worth millions. It just goes to show that no matter how small an idea you think you have, and no matter how young or old the “inventor” is, protect your properties. What seems like nothing could very well be the "next big thing" in new business.

[Photo: Mark Zuckerberg].

AOL Settles Suit

AOL has just settled a U.S. suit for $3 million bucks. The money will be awarded to customers who claimed the company continued to charge them for service even after they canceled their accounts.

Apparently it was difficult to cancel an AOL account. VERY difficult. The first thing that comes to my mind about AOL in Canada is the massive marketing promotion it held back in the dial-up days. I’d be surprised if there’s anyone out there who doesn’t recall having received an AOL installation CD through the mail, or some other promotional means. The CD was clearly emblazoned with the promise of a “free trial”. The only exception was that you had to provide a credit card number, and, unless you called to cancel before the trial period was up, charges would begin incurring each month. Fair enough, as long as the rules and regulations were clearly stated. Ahh, memories...

Anyway, back to the U.S.: according to the suit, which was settled with 48 states and the District of Columbia, AOL will, in addition to refunding money to subscribers, ensure that customers are able to easily cancel an account online.

The Globe & Mail report cites one particular consumer complaint as helping to get the wheels of this suit in motion. One Vincent Ferrari not only wrote about his cancellation woes on his blog; he also recorded and posted audio conversations he had with reps trying to cancel the account! This led to a swarm of commentary from others, as well as a slew of TV and radio interviews.

It’s safe to assume that AOL call centre reps in the States have been provided with updated training on dealing with account cancellations.