Copyright Law – Fair Use
Imagine oneself in a predicament where someone’s work was used in a negative way and the copyright owner disapproved of the harsh display. How would the issue be resolved? Was it used fairly? In many cases people find themselves with their work viewed in a negative manner. However, this is where fair use is a probability.
Fair use is somewhat a replication of copyrighted work completed for a restricted purpose, for example to leave a remark, duplicates a copyrighted work or, censure. These uses could be done without the copyright owner’s approval. Instead of breaking the copyright law, fair use is a defense. The four factors used to determine whether or not a use is fair are “(1) the intention and disposition of the use.- which is the determining factor which the courts rely on to make a decision as to whether the use is fair and what was the purpose. (2) The copyrighted features. – When the reproducer is sent to court they exam the types of material to see if it factual. (3) How much form was taken from the copywriter. – No one really knows how much to take from a copyright work because there is no manual. As an alternative courts evaluate the uses and their comparative to the work. (4) If market or income was taken away from the owner. – This is one of the utmost important factors in the court because the court will exam the affect of the market. (Crew 2).
The courts would weigh out the four factors when evaluating fair use, Most of the time when fair use defense is set is when the violation is disapproved, or studied. The general guidelines that could be useful but not precise in every situation towards examining fair use: (1) a usage that takes some of the unusual work. (2) Making sure the reproduc...
... middle of paper ...
... determining whether or not a specific use is fair. Various federal courts stand by section 107 in order to resolve most cases of fair use. Making sure the reproducer known the four factor just in case someone files a fair use case on them, letting reproducers beware that they could probably be sued or go to jail because of the consequence of using fair use in an unruly manner probably would allow them to be more mindful about the matter. Information that needs to be found or researched would have to be when a resolution of a use allows fair use. That would be one of my issues. Allowing the community to know when the copyright material of the use is acceptable is a wonderful way of getting the community involved and also letting them know the four factors in Fair Use so that citizens would not run into any problem with the law or a copyright holder in the future.
Campbell v. Acuff-Rose is significant for future cases because the ruling says courts need to use all four parts of the fair use test, the work as a whole, not just certain parts of it. The defense didn’t cause harm on the plaintiff and that will be significant for future cases involving fair use with anything, not just music. It would work for photographs, videos, books, etc. As long as a new object is created fair use of an object can be used.
As an audience member I am sympathetic. This is a subject of which I had some prior knowledge on before watching the video and had already formulated my opinion. I believe the author, Lawrence Lessig, is trying to reach a neutral audience. After showing multiple videos in which different types of creative expression are shown, Lessig branches off into the topic of copyright laws. He introduces this topic as something new when he states, “So much is not new, there is something that is new.” This implies that the audience would not already be aware of the type of occurrences being discussed and therefor they would not have already formed an opinion making them neutral.
Copyright and fair use laws are laws that allow for creators of works to have rights to their creations. But, they also allow the free use of works, in the effort to get your point across. Fair use can be defined as the doctrine that brief excerpts of copyrighted material may, under certain circumstances, be quoted verbatim for purposes such as criticism, news reporting, teaching, and research, without the need for permission from or payment to the copyright holder. This doctrine shows how the general public is available to reproduce copyrighted material without acquiring consent. While, this is true, we are only allowed to reproduce part of the information, not the entirety of the work. These can include news reporting, teaching purposes,
“Anyone else who uses copyright material in those ways will infringe copyright unless they have permission from the copyright owner or a special exception applies. One act may result in the infringement of several copyrights” (Film & Copyright, 2012, p. ...
One of my art professors told the class about Richard Prince, who is a collage artist. He was sued by the photographer Patrick Cariou. Prince took Cariou’s photo and drew on them or pieced them together with other images to create his works. Some pieces were major transformation and other were minimal. Some of the artwork was deemed as falling under fair use while others were determined to be copyright infringement.
I will be defending the Fair(y) Use Tale and there are a lot of facts to prove that the Fair(y) Use Tale is not copyright infringement. Fair use shows a bunch of times that this is not copyright infringement like the length of clips it's kind of like a remix it cites where it gets it from in a way and it is educational. That is what we will be talking about to defend Eric Faden.Here is are a the reasons why i think it is not copyright infringement. One reason Fair(y) Use Tale is not doing copyright infringement is its only using small clips of disney. . The Fair(y) Use Tale is educational so it can't be copyright infringement. The first thing I will cover is what fair use really is. The doctrine that brief excerpts of copyrighted material may,
Shields writes that an artist “has a right to use…material taken from all sources” because “what he had judged suitable for his purpose has become through this very use his mental property”
Weaver, Cat, 2011, Law vs. Art Criticism: Judging Appropriation Art, Hyperallergic, http://hyperallergic.com/23589/judging-appropriation-art/ (Accessed 25th April 2014)
“A Fair(y) Use Tale” used multiple clips from the movies “The Lion King”, “pocahontas”, “Beauty and the Beast”, and more. A commonly used defense against creative authors who use other people's works is: This work is demonetizing our movies, as it strikes harmful criticisms on our works.
‘Copying, reinterpreting, quoting, and translating are all terms that have been utilised as alternative descriptions for the phenomenon known as “appropriation”, the action of taking or making use of something without authority or legal right. This practice often involves borrowing, mimicking, or even stealing, and it is highly contested and criticized in the contemporary art world’ (Gorman, C 2013, p. 215).
Copyright Law of the United States of America. (2013). Retrieved from Copyright United States Copyright Office.
Professor Faden’s Fair(y) Use video should not be considered copyrighted or plagiarized. It instead should be considered fair use for a many number of reasons. One, in the beginning of the video it explicitly states it is “not associated with, authorized by or to be confused with any product of the Walt Disney Company, or Disney Studios.”the second reason that it should not be promoted as copyright is that by showing the Sleeping Beauty’s Castle is a form of free advertising of-sorts towards Disney Studios. By others viewing this, it shows where they got the clips from (in other words it references the original source of all the content displayed). The third reason is that it is simply a mashup of clips from the movies. The final product was
Copyright is not a natural process; it is essentially an agreement between the state and an artist, where the state gives the artist a monopoly on works they make for a certain time in hopes that this artist will continue to create more works. This agreement is beneficial for all parties; the artist gets money for their work (as no one is allowed to produce copies unless granted permission) and an incentive to create new works. The state has artisans to keep the public happy.
particular interest to educators is the “fair use” doctrine, which extends a get-out-of-jail-free card (so to speak) to anyone using copyrighted...
Copyright infringement is a major issue with media ethics. Many people confuse copyright infringement with trademark infringement (Miller, 2012). However, copyright infringement is when someone unlawfully uses a particular work that is protected by copyright law. These works can include: movies, pictures, songs, albums, artwork, pieces of literature, and newspapers. There is no reason for any of the previous to be copyright infringed, because there are ways to correctly cite all of them as sources, without illegally copyright infringing them. Most people simply do not use their resources to help them with their citing.