5 ms·

Everyone has broadcasting rights. This man should as well.

by AckSyn 10y ago

6stringmerc 10y ago
Honest question: Do you think Facebook's ToS grants him exclusive rights to anything Published or Broadcast to the General Public by way of their platform?
- fenwick67 10y ago
  There is this to the contrary: " When you publish content or information using the Public setting, it means that you are allowing everyone, including people off of Facebook, to access and use that information, and to associate it with you (i.e., your name and profile picture)"
  - 6stringmerc 10y ago
    Thanks for posting that - I was genuinely curious and I'm fairly certain what you quote is legally supportable against the personal broadcast rights notion in this case. The "newsworthy" threshold in Fair Use almost isn't needed, but certainly seems to help. I don't have any expectation of Copyright Ownership on whatever I broadcast on Periscope...different rights might be entailed (e.g. endorsement, use of likeness) but that public visible thing is hard to reconcile in this instance...and I think that's totally okay.
- AckSyn 10y ago
  Yes. he's the creator and it's up to him as a matter of legality to decide where and how his creations are distributed. Much like what the NFL does. (regardless of how easy it is to pirate something) Everyone holds the copyright to their work immediately during and after its creation. There's no filing like you'd have to do with a Trademark. Putting in on a medium that's FCC regulated means he may have some recourse.
  - rhizome 10y ago
    To be clear, you don't have to register copyrights in order to have a copyright in a creation, but you do have to register copyrights in order to sue for damages.
    - anigbrowl 10y ago
      Strictly speaking no, you can still sue for economic damages and win, but registering lets you get statutory damages which are punitive in nature, up to 3x the economic damages. Economic damages are limited to what you'd have been owed if they licensed it at prevailing rates.
      - rhizome 10y ago
        Sorry, yes. I had it backwards.
dsp1234 10y ago
He has the same rights everyone else does, copyright on his creative works, including this video. That's not the issue at hand. The issue at hand is: Is if Fair Use to use 22 seconds of a 45 minute video to report on newsworthy topic? The answer is yes. Showing select excerpts of copyrighted work for the purposes of news and commentary is a classical Fair Use example. The reverse of your statement is also true: Everyone has right to assert a Fair Use exemption. This news agency should as well.
- anigbrowl 10y ago
  This is like the famous assertion that the rich as well as the poor are free to sleep under bridges. To ignore the relative financial strength of the two actors is inequitable.
  - dsp1234 10y ago
    Regardless of who the actors are, this is classical Fair Use. The reason you don't see the opposite very often (major media company's materials being used in a Fair Use manner) is that company's lawyers are smart enough to see it's Fair Use, and that their case would be thrown out of court almost immediately.

Everyone has broadcasting rights. This man should as well.

by AckSyn 10y ago

Everyone has broadcasting rights. This man should as well.

Honest question: Do you think Facebook's ToS grants him exclusive rights to anything Published or Broadcast to the General Public by way of their platform?

fenwick67 10y ago
There is this to the contrary: " When you publish content or information using the Public setting, it means that you are allowing everyone, including people off of Facebook, to access and use that information, and to associate it with you (i.e., your name and profile picture)"
- 6stringmerc 10y ago
  Thanks for posting that - I was genuinely curious and I'm fairly certain what you quote is legally supportable against the personal broadcast rights notion in this case. The "newsworthy" threshold in Fair Use almost isn't needed, but certainly seems to help. I don't have any expectation of Copyright Ownership on whatever I broadcast on Periscope...different rights might be entailed (e.g. endorsement, use of likeness) but that public visible thing is hard to reconcile in this instance...and I think that's totally okay.
AckSyn 10y ago
Yes. he's the creator and it's up to him as a matter of legality to decide where and how his creations are distributed. Much like what the NFL does. (regardless of how easy it is to pirate something) Everyone holds the copyright to their work immediately during and after its creation. There's no filing like you'd have to do with a Trademark. Putting in on a medium that's FCC regulated means he may have some recourse.
- rhizome 10y ago
  To be clear, you don't have to register copyrights in order to have a copyright in a creation, but you do have to register copyrights in order to sue for damages.
  - anigbrowl 10y ago
    Strictly speaking no, you can still sue for economic damages and win, but registering lets you get statutory damages which are punitive in nature, up to 3x the economic damages. Economic damages are limited to what you'd have been owed if they licensed it at prevailing rates.
    - rhizome 10y ago
      Sorry, yes. I had it backwards.

dsp1234 10y ago

He has the same rights everyone else does, copyright on his creative works, including this video. That's not the issue at hand. The issue at hand is: Is if Fair Use to use 22 seconds of a 45 minute video to report on newsworthy topic? The answer is yes. Showing select excerpts of copyrighted work for the purposes of news and commentary is a classical Fair Use example. The reverse of your statement is also true: Everyone has right to assert a Fair Use exemption. This news agency should as well.

anigbrowl 10y ago
This is like the famous assertion that the rich as well as the poor are free to sleep under bridges. To ignore the relative financial strength of the two actors is inequitable.
- dsp1234 10y ago
  Regardless of who the actors are, this is classical Fair Use. The reason you don't see the opposite very often (major media company's materials being used in a Fair Use manner) is that company's lawyers are smart enough to see it's Fair Use, and that their case would be thrown out of court almost immediately.