4 ms·

Sotomayor didn't consider the artwork transformative enough to warrant fair use. The Supreme Court is stacked with idiots across the political spectrum.

tetromino_ 3y ago
Sotomayor's argument, as I understand it, is that transformation into a direct replacement of the original work in a given commercial context is not fair use. So it's not fair use to transform a photo of Prince for the purpose of illustrating magazine articles about Prince, where the original, untransformed photo could have illustrated the article equally well. But presumably it would be fair use to transform a photo of Prince for the purpose of illustrating magazine articles about the history of pop art, where using the original photo would be inappropriate.
freejazz 3y ago
[flagged]
- graderjs 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - freejazz 3y ago
    I'm not telling you to be silent because I disagree with you. I'm not sure how that couldn't be more clear. It's because you have no idea what you are talking about and you are doing any reader a disservice.
    - dang 3y ago
      Could you please make your substantive points thoughtfully and respectfully? You've been breaking the site guidelines pretty badly in this thread, unfortunately. On HN, if you know more than others, the thing to do is share correct information from what you know. Then the rest of us can learn something. If you don't want to do that or don't have time, that's ok, but then please just chalk it up to the internet being wrong about everything and let it go. Responding with putdowns or swipes just makes everything worse—especially if you actually do know more, because then the correct view gets associated with bad behavior, which hurts everybody. (I've written about this in the past in case it's helpful: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=truth%20discredit%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...). If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

tetromino_ 3y ago

Sotomayor's argument, as I understand it, is that transformation into a direct replacement of the original work in a given commercial context is not fair use. So it's not fair use to transform a photo of Prince for the purpose of illustrating magazine articles about Prince, where the original, untransformed photo could have illustrated the article equally well. But presumably it would be fair use to transform a photo of Prince for the purpose of illustrating magazine articles about the history of pop art, where using the original photo would be inappropriate.

freejazz 3y ago

[flagged]

graderjs 3y ago
[flagged]
- freejazz 3y ago
  I'm not telling you to be silent because I disagree with you. I'm not sure how that couldn't be more clear. It's because you have no idea what you are talking about and you are doing any reader a disservice.
  - dang 3y ago
    Could you please make your substantive points thoughtfully and respectfully? You've been breaking the site guidelines pretty badly in this thread, unfortunately. On HN, if you know more than others, the thing to do is share correct information from what you know. Then the rest of us can learn something. If you don't want to do that or don't have time, that's ok, but then please just chalk it up to the internet being wrong about everything and let it go. Responding with putdowns or swipes just makes everything worse—especially if you actually do know more, because then the correct view gets associated with bad behavior, which hurts everybody. (I've written about this in the past in case it's helpful: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=truth%20discredit%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...). If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.