Today I am going to be explaining exactly why Professor Faden’s video ‘Fair(y) Use Tale Trial’ has caused a great deal of problems, due to the appearance of it being copyright. At a first look the video just screams copyright, anyone could agree with that. But with a little dedication and a fair amount of research, It's clear the purpose of the video was education and parody. Point, blank, period. The reason it is not illegal is because these two factors (Education and Parody) fall under Fair use, Professor Faden did not violate any copyright laws in the creation of the video. He took several creative works and transformed them into a ten minute educational video on fair use and the laws of copyright. Not only was the video beautifully structured, it was quite entertaining. The mash up of multiple colorful movies put together in such a short amount of time is absolutely extraordinary. His video was exactly like a remix, it actually was a remix. So isn't remixing legal? Do you see songs that have been remixed being taken down off the internet everyday, claiming fair use? No i didn't think so. Because the right to remix/mash has NEVER been illegal, so why is it a big deal now? I think it's because Walt Disney Studios is a company based off money, they don't want anyone making money off their own creations. But i haven't mentioned …show more content…
I firmly believe that he could recognize copyright with just a glance. And i'm quite sure he knows the fair use factors, which is why he created what he did, and how he did. The education factor is in play. The parody factor is in play. The only factors left out would be criticizing or commenting, and news reporting. There is absolutely, without a doubt, NO copyright violations within Professor Faden's video. This is the last and only time i'm going to say this. Professor Faden is innocent, he has committed NO crimes! I rest my
In a persuasive essay, these are excellent forms of appealing to the audience and guiding them to follow the line of thinking Worthen has. She begins with an anecdote to introduce her struggle as a professor, drawing the readers from the very beginning. With the readers reeled in, Worthen is able to explain how professors understand lecturing to truly be. She emphasizes how they have the best intentions for their students, wanting to push them harder and further than they could imagine. Worthen tied her evidence with every argument that she posed to her reader. Her use of expert opinions stand out due to her frequent use of them. She interviewed an array of professors, along with a student to help emphasis how lecturing has really expanded their horizons of teaching and learning, respectively. Although the evidence may seem a bit faulty due to it strictly coming from her opinions, she does an excellent job tying it with the expert onions she has gathered from different professors. Worthen also gives a student input to help validate all these ideas from the perspective of a former
Putting concrete limitations and rules on what an artist can and cannot use when expressing their opinion of another artist’s work is unconstitutional. If we put a price on the freedom of speech, we place a fine on our liberties.
My article of choice is “On pins and needles defending artistic expression” this article was posted on boston.com on April 8, 2010, written by Carol Rose. Carol Rose is a really busy woman, graduating from Stanford University and Harvard Law school, Carol is the executive director of the ACLU of Massachusetts, starting in January 2003, an attorney specializing in First Amendment and media law, intellectual property, civil rights, and international human rights law , and a journalist. “Carol has spent her career advocating for human rights and civil liberties both in the United States and abroad, including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nepal, Japan, Sri Lanka, Israel, the West Bank and Gaza, Northern Ireland, and Vietnam”. (https://aclum.org/about/staff-advocates/carol-rose/).
In Charles W. Moore’s essay, “Is Music Piracy Stealing?” Moore uses great statistics of the people who are concerned and not concerned about music piracy. He gives many examples of the facts he has researched and gives an ethical appeal to his audience. “This week the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) launched an ad campaign using the slogan ‘copying is stealing,’ attempting to convey the message that digital copying is as serious and criminal as stealing a CD from a record shop or a DVD from a video shop” (Moore 242). However, throughout Moore’s entire essay he has a weak introduction and conclusion paragraph, repetitive examples, examples that do not apply to his topic and he uses many logical
... middle of paper ... ... ever acknowledged before. During the course of this coursework I have gained much needed skills that I can use throughout my life to come. I have learnt to recognize and identify when I am trying to be mislead to believing false information, this cannot only be used in films but in adverts and programmes.
Ferguson focuses on the importance of creativity and how much we can build off of each others ideas. Remixing is using tools already invented to build new products, it opens a door to an on going process of new inventions and ideas. Ferguson shows the importance and the huge effect remixing has on our music industry and even technology on today’s market. Remixing gives
every case, banned music or the creation of “edited” music has been disregarded and people have
Over the past decade the societal view of creative society has greatly changed due to advances in computer technology and the Internet. In 1995, aware of the beginning of this change, two authors wrote articles in Wired Magazine expressing diametrically opposed views on how this technological change would take form, and how it would affect copyright law. In the article "The Emperor's Clothes Still Fit Just Fine" Lance Rose hypothesized that the criminal nature of copyright infringement would prevent it from developing into a socially acceptable practice. Thus, he wrote, we would not need to revise copyright law to prevent copyright infringement. In another article, Entitled "Intellectual Value", Esther Dyson presented a completely different view of the copyright issue. She based many her arguments on the belief that mainstream copyright infringement would proliferate in the following years, causing a radical revision of American ideas and laws towards intellectual property. What has happened since then? Who was right? This paper analyzes the situation then and now, with the knowledge that these trends are still in a state of transformation. As new software and hardware innovations make it easier to create, copy, alter, and disseminate original digital content, this discussion will be come even more critical.
According to “The Changing Landscape of the Music Business,” Artists have to develop an image that appeals to the supporters in order to be unique. This can be achieved through the promotion of their music, but if the artist makes the wrong move, this can result in the artist struggling to sustain their career. There are many ways that licensing music can go wrong, with it either going into the wrong hands, or is abused with promotion so that the song isn’t enjoyed anymore, resulting in less sales or profit for the
Music censorship has been a major problem plaguing America for over fifty years. In 1957, Elvis Pressley was only allowed to be filmed from the waist up on the Ed Sullivan show (Nuzum 1). Plenty of controversy has taken places between then and now, but more recently it has become much more prominent in the media, and people and organizations are beginning to actually take a stand. For example, Island Records (owned by Disney) dropped the Insane Clown Posse just after their release of The Great Milenko and MTV actually refused to play Madonna's video for Justify My Love because it was considered too sexually explicit (Nuzum 1).
A copyright prohibits the unauthorized reproduction of creative works such as books, magazines, poems, drawings, paintings, musical compositions, sound recordings, films, and DVDs (Barnes, Dworkin & Richards, 2011). Though many people do file, copyrights do not require any special filing or process other than personal creativity, copyrights take formation automatically. Any creative works created prior to 1978 exist for 75 years. Creative works created after 1978 exist for the life of the author plus an additional seventy (70) years. Copyrights are given to an author/creato...
Music Copyright is a very important aspect of the music industry. The Copyright law was established to preserve the creativity and rights of authors, composers, performers of expression. Copyright is the law that protects the property rights of the creator of an original work in a fixed tangible medium. (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/copyright) A fixed tangible medium is something substantial like copying lyrics on paper or putting a song on tape or CD. Copyright can be seen every where in the music industry. Many music artist of our culture today have been involved in copyright issues. Recently, on MTV news it was stated that, "As the music industry becomes increasingly concerned about protecting the integrity of artists copyrights in the age of MP3. Prince has now filed a motion in New York federal court aimed at shutting down several websites offering free downloads of the Artist's songs." (http://www.mtv.com…19990304/prince.jhtml) In addition, in recent music news, "Nine Inch Nails lead man Trent Reznor copyright infringement suit was dismissed. Another artist claimed that the Reznor had stolen material for his last album." (http://www.mtv.com…19991202/nine_inch_nails.jhtml) The copyright law has become an important legal aspect to know our music generation.
When one thinks of a remix, usually they are reminded of the Music Industry’s practice of slightly changing and re-releasing a single multiple times in order to capitalize on the popularity of a song. It is pretty much a given that m...
Levy, Steven. “Issues of Intellectual Property & Copyright for Educators”. Newsweek. 27 Feb. 1995. 26 Jan. 2003
This case study will examine the moral issues of intellectual property rights and the effects they have on society. There are many varying stances on the subject of intellectual property, with people opposing either or both of intellectual property ownership and creative commons for various reasons. Mandatory copyrighting and patenting of inventions and published works has the potential to majorly restrict advancements in science and culture.