4 ms·

I know the purpose of this is really to avoid the clip going viral but I’m curious whether there have been any cases addressing whether this situation could fal

I know the purpose of this is really to avoid the clip going viral but I’m curious whether there have been any cases addressing whether this situation could fall under fair use with respect to the person recording? Videos like this are usually newsworthy (and not made for commercial purposes) and the copyrighted material is incidental to the purpose of the recording. I suppose I’m wondering whether this is an actual potential legal issue for the people making/posting these videos or whether the only issue is the headache of YouTube’s takedown process? If someone posts a video like this how likely is it they’ve infringed on someone else’s copyright? Being careful not solicit legal advice maybe a better question is, what factors would be relevant to weighing whether or not the video infringes on the copyright? I guess it’s difficult for me to wrap my head around how there could be infringement without the (intentional?) misappropriation of the work.

dctoedt 5y ago
> whether this situation could fall under fair use with respect to the person recording? IMHO the person posting the YouTube video with the Taylor Swift song in background would have an excellent shot at a fair-use defense against any claim of infringement of the copyright in the song or the recording (which could be two different things). See, e.g., https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/ https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/ I also strongly suspect that the owner of the copyright(s) in question would think very hard before making an infringement claim in the first place, for fear of the adverse publicity.
- KeytarHero 5y ago
  > I also strongly suspect that the owner of the copyright(s) in question would think very hard before making an infringement claim in the first place, for fear of the adverse publicity. Except the entity that would make an infringement claim is an algorithm, not a person
dctoedt 5y ago
> what factors would be relevant to weighing whether or not the video infringes on the copyright? "As a general matter, copyright infringement occurs when a copyrighted work is reproduced, distributed, performed, publicly displayed, or made into a derivative work without the permission of the copyright owner." https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-definitions.html https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-definitions.html See also a useful FAQ-style article, especially Myth #4: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/intellectual_property_law/publications/landslide/2018-19/july-august/debunking-copyright-myths/ https://www.americanbar.org/groups/intellectual_property_law... ------ > I guess it’s difficult for me to wrap my head around how there could be infringement without the (intentional?) misappropriation of the work. Intent isn't a factor in determining whether infringement exists (as opposed to whether a fair-use defense is available). "The U.S. Copyright Act is a strict liability statute. In other words, following a “rule” that you believe to be true but which turns out to be a myth will not excuse you from liability for infringement. Under certain circumstances, it is possible to plead “innocent infringement,” but even that only serves to reduce the amount of damages you may owe and does not excuse your infringement." (From the ABA "Myths" article cited above.)

dctoedt 5y ago

> whether this situation could fall under fair use with respect to the person recording? IMHO the person posting the YouTube video with the Taylor Swift song in background would have an excellent shot at a fair-use defense against any claim of infringement of the copyright in the song or the recording (which could be two different things). See, e.g., https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/ https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/ I also strongly suspect that the owner of the copyright(s) in question would think very hard before making an infringement claim in the first place, for fear of the adverse publicity.

KeytarHero 5y ago
> I also strongly suspect that the owner of the copyright(s) in question would think very hard before making an infringement claim in the first place, for fear of the adverse publicity. Except the entity that would make an infringement claim is an algorithm, not a person

dctoedt 5y ago

> what factors would be relevant to weighing whether or not the video infringes on the copyright? "As a general matter, copyright infringement occurs when a copyrighted work is reproduced, distributed, performed, publicly displayed, or made into a derivative work without the permission of the copyright owner." https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-definitions.html https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-definitions.html See also a useful FAQ-style article, especially Myth #4: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/intellectual_property_law/publications/landslide/2018-19/july-august/debunking-copyright-myths/ https://www.americanbar.org/groups/intellectual_property_law... ------ > I guess it’s difficult for me to wrap my head around how there could be infringement without the (intentional?) misappropriation of the work. Intent isn't a factor in determining whether infringement exists (as opposed to whether a fair-use defense is available). "The U.S. Copyright Act is a strict liability statute. In other words, following a “rule” that you believe to be true but which turns out to be a myth will not excuse you from liability for infringement. Under certain circumstances, it is possible to plead “innocent infringement,” but even that only serves to reduce the amount of damages you may owe and does not excuse your infringement." (From the ABA "Myths" article cited above.)