4 ms·
Unfortunately, my fair use claim was denied without explanation by the copyright holder. Denied by the copyright holder? Now we see that the system does not e
by dkarl 16y ago
Unfortunately, my fair use claim was denied without explanation by the copyright holder.
Denied by the copyright holder? Now we see that the system does not exist to uphold the law, but rather to serve copyright holders whether they have the law on their side or not.
- ergo98 16y agoI really don't think that Jeff's assumption of fair use would stand any legal test: You can't use excerpts of movies to add humor to a piece. That is not fair use. Fair use entails criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use != bedazzling a blog post with humorous excerpts.
- codinghorror 16y agoIn http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2010/09/go-that-way-really-fast.html http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2010/09/go-that-way-really-... the video clip wasn't just "bedazzling", it was the entire central thesis of my opinion piece. Ditto for this upcoming one (not published yet). I'd also advise you to check out http://www.centerforsocialmedia.org/fair-use/related-materials/codes/code-best-practices-fair-use-online-video http://www.centerforsocialmedia.org/fair-use/related-materia...
- timwiseman 16y agoAgreed and moreover on YouTube it is not part of his blog, but a separate standalone entity. Someone coming to it from YouTub may never see his blog or even be cognizant of the fact that there was commentary (or at least humor in a different context) associated with it at all.
- tomerico 16y agoHe can mark it as 'unlisted' to overcome that problem.
- stonemetal 16y ago1.the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes 3.the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and 4.the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. It was for personal use, not much was taken and there was no market effect so it very well could be fair use.
- ergo98 16y agoIt was not for nonprofit educational purposes. It isn't even reasonable to say it was for personal use given that Jeff's last blog entry was packed full of affiliate links. His blog is a commercial enterprise.
- oasisbob 16y agoCommercial use does not invalidate a defense of fair use, it's only one part of a multi-part test. Don't equate fair use with classroom use. There are enough uptight librarians who do that already.
- AgentConundrum 16y agoIs it really for personal use when it's being broadcast over the internet? The feedburner stat on the side of his blog says he has 111k "readers" so it seems pretty impersonal.
- sesqu 16y agoWhat makes you think he wanted to add humour? Granted, the previous clip was from a comedy, but it was there as inspiration for commentary. It wasn't a tack-on joke. The clip in question this time appears to have been an excerpt from The Last King of Scotland regarding actionable advice. It was denied by Fox - I got the impression that it's a group-wide policy.
- baddox 16y agoCourts should also consider the length of the excerpt and the potential affect on the market for that work.
- lftl 16y agoWhile I don't have any evidence I'm inclined to believed that Jeff just assumed that the copyright holder reviewed his claim. I'm fairly confident it's YouTube staff that would review the claim and decide if it's fair use or not.
- dkarl 16y agoIf that's true, then the story boils down to what Lawrence Lessig and others have warned about for years: you can't depend on the inherent nature of the internet or any other technology to nullify bad laws.