Group items tagged

If one remix/mashup is ruled to be under fair use could all potentially be fair use as well? ... Has one been ruled fair use? If so, why isn't that case used as landmark/"resource" case for others

After I stumbled upon the iconic Obama "Hope" poster, I remembered that back in 2009, artist Shepard Fairey was being sued by the owner of the original photograph (AP). Back then I was not very interested in copyright issues, so I never checked what happened with this case. It's interesting and kind of fair that AP and Shepard settled on working together, sharing the rights, and collaborating on other images+photographs. Even though Shepard transformed a "stolen" photograph, his "theft" actually put the original photo on the map. I consider it to be a fair solution for a fair use case.

Interesting history of the bootleg radios (Free Radio). Some logos are really cool, the second one looks like an RKO Radio Pictures but says "Free Radio" and has a hand of an individual holding the tower... In the end of the article there is a FAIR USE message that says: "This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.." Isn't that what we all want?  They also make sure that they "DO NOT CONDONE ILLEGAL PIRATE HF RADIO ACTIVITY": it's better to have a legal radio station than have  "FCC KNOCKING AT YOU DOOR."

An article about how (as the title suggests) parodies are fair use...usually.

The US gov's idea of fair use. 

This is soooo coool!!!  It talks about copyright law using fair use clips from movies.  Also, check out the remixed language in the green FBI warning page at the beginning!

The FBI Fair Use warning!

Dr. E. Michael Harrington discusses why sampling should have fair use privileges.

"UCLA Professor of Law Neil Netanel discusses the evolution of sampling and the jurisprudence of sampling, and the current state of copyright law in regard to the practice. He also discusses where the line between "fair use" and copyright infringement is currently considered to be, and the risks that artists take on when they choose to sample existing works." Exactly what we talked about in class: uncertainty, dangers, chained creativity (fewer sampling due to the expense of clearing rights, as well as having to hide the samples deep within the track due to fear of lawsuits).

While it is true that oneof the goals of the Copyright Act is to discourage infringement, it is by no means the only goal of that Act. The Constitution grants to Congress the power "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." U. S. Const., Art. I, § 8, cl. 8. We have often recognized the monopoly privileges that Congress has authorized, while "intended to motivate the creative activity of authors and inventors by the provision of a special reward," are limited in nature and must ultimately serve the public good. For example, in Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aiken, 422 U.S. 151, 156 (1975), we discussed the policies underlying the 1909 Copyright Act as follows: "The limited scope of the copyright holder's statutory monopoly . . . reflects a balance of competing claims upon the public interest: Creative work is to be encouraged and rewarded, but private motivation must ultimately serve the cause of promoting broad public availability of literature, music, and the other arts. The immediate effect of our copyright law is to secure a fair return for an `author's' creative labor. But the ultimate aim is, by this incentive, to stimulate artistic creativity for the general public good." (Footnotes omitted.) We reiterated this theme in Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340, 349-350 (1991), where we said: "The primary objective of copyright is not to reward the labor of authors, but `[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts.' To this end, copyright assures authors the right to their original expression, but encourages others to build freely upon the ideas and information conveyed by a work." (Citations omitted.) Because copyright law ultimately serves the purpose of enriching the general public through access to creative works, it is peculiarly important that the boundaries of copyrigh

Mash-up of Superfreak and Can't Touch This.  They flow so seamlessly!  I wonder why?