4 ms·

>> Are you laundering 5 lines of code? Probably fair use. >The amount of copying does not matter for a copyright claim. This is incorrect. The amount of mater

>> Are you laundering 5 lines of code? Probably fair use. >The amount of copying does not matter for a copyright claim. This is incorrect. The amount of material used is the third factor in a fair use test. There are other ways it comes up as well (e.g. damage calculations). >> Are you trying to launder, or is it unintentional? > I'm not a lawyer but in the US, Copyright is a strict liability statute which means intent does not matter. In this context, this is incorrect as well. People seem to be misinterpreting laws pretty badly, so instead of explaining how to apply here, I'll give a simpler, analogous context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_Liability_Limitation_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_... In this context, it depends on a lot of things, such as direct versus contributory infringement. This would likely be a contributory infringement case, where intent is almost a requirement. https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/what-is-contributory-infringement.html https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/what-is-contr... Keep in mind these are all factors. They matter, so they'll help swing a case one way or the other, but they're not something you can bank on in isolation. That's what will make for interesting case law.

gravypod 5y ago
> This is incorrect. The amount of material used is the third factor in a fair use test. There are other ways it comes up as well (e.g. damage calculations). The 3rd factor of the fair use test deals with how substantial the copied material is in relation to the entire work. You can make a copy of 100% of the original work and have it still be fair use while in another situation copying 0.002% of an original work would not be fair use. The measurable amount (bytes, seconds, square inches) you are copying does not matter here. Instead the "importance" of what you are copying to your criticism is being defined in this prong. For instance: I am a movie buff and: 1. Make a copy of the entire movie of Citizen Kane 2. Remove the audio and replace it with a commentary track going over every framing/camera trick through the movie 3. Upload this to an educational youtube channel that teaches viewers how to shoot a movie I would likely be allowed to use fair use as a defense to a copyright claim. Here, if an expert could say all 100% of Citizen Kane's film, contained relevant film techniques that I was actively commenting on, I would have copied the correct amount for my usage. If I instead owned a movie review channel and I said "Citizen Kane is my favorite movie" and I displayed the entire movie after that I would likely not be using an appropriate amount of the film. It's also important to note that fair use is a very narrow defense that covers a very limited subset of uses. It is not a generally applicable, or even a guideline, for how to skirt around copyrights.
- murgindrag 5y ago
  There are plenty of errors in this, and you're confusing the four prongs, but I'll run with it for now, since it's good enough. If I am doing code autocomplete, and copying three lines out of your program, those three lines are exceptionally unlikely to be "substantial ... in relation to the entire work." Where you're confused is lots of places, but the biggest one is you're mixing up the prongs. Most of the reason your Citizen Kane example might work (it probably wouldn't) is Factor #1, character of use. Commentary and education are favorable. I can come up with examples where 0.002% of an original work would not be okay, but they're pretty contrived. For your benefit, a random link: https://guides.lib.utexas.edu/fairuse/fourfactor https://guides.lib.utexas.edu/fairuse/fourfactor Size definitely matters. It's not a hard-and-fast rule, but a factor.

gravypod 5y ago

> This is incorrect. The amount of material used is the third factor in a fair use test. There are other ways it comes up as well (e.g. damage calculations). The 3rd factor of the fair use test deals with how substantial the copied material is in relation to the entire work. You can make a copy of 100% of the original work and have it still be fair use while in another situation copying 0.002% of an original work would not be fair use. The measurable amount (bytes, seconds, square inches) you are copying does not matter here. Instead the "importance" of what you are copying to your criticism is being defined in this prong. For instance: I am a movie buff and: 1. Make a copy of the entire movie of Citizen Kane 2. Remove the audio and replace it with a commentary track going over every framing/camera trick through the movie 3. Upload this to an educational youtube channel that teaches viewers how to shoot a movie I would likely be allowed to use fair use as a defense to a copyright claim. Here, if an expert could say all 100% of Citizen Kane's film, contained relevant film techniques that I was actively commenting on, I would have copied the correct amount for my usage. If I instead owned a movie review channel and I said "Citizen Kane is my favorite movie" and I displayed the entire movie after that I would likely not be using an appropriate amount of the film. It's also important to note that fair use is a very narrow defense that covers a very limited subset of uses. It is not a generally applicable, or even a guideline, for how to skirt around copyrights.

murgindrag 5y ago
There are plenty of errors in this, and you're confusing the four prongs, but I'll run with it for now, since it's good enough. If I am doing code autocomplete, and copying three lines out of your program, those three lines are exceptionally unlikely to be "substantial ... in relation to the entire work." Where you're confused is lots of places, but the biggest one is you're mixing up the prongs. Most of the reason your Citizen Kane example might work (it probably wouldn't) is Factor #1, character of use. Commentary and education are favorable. I can come up with examples where 0.002% of an original work would not be okay, but they're pretty contrived. For your benefit, a random link: https://guides.lib.utexas.edu/fairuse/fourfactor https://guides.lib.utexas.edu/fairuse/fourfactor Size definitely matters. It's not a hard-and-fast rule, but a factor.