3 ms·

for those of us just following along from home, care to provide some specifics, the nature of the fair use misunderstanding, and where xenophobia, conspiracy th

by zzzeek 14y ago

for those of us just following along from home, care to provide some specifics, the nature of the fair use misunderstanding, and where xenophobia, conspiracy theories reside in this article ?

tzs 14y ago
He quotes a part of the copyright law that is giving examples of the kind of things that might be fair use, and then cuts it off before it gets to the part where it lists factors to be considered when deciding if a particular use is fair use. He seems to think that anything that falls under the examples is automatically fair use. The xenophobia comes from the several needless mentions of the fact that some of the publishers are foreign owned. The conspiracy theory stuff comes from the part about someone who once worked for the RIAA now being at the Copyright Office. If you follow the links, you find that the former RIAA person was a litigator for the RIAA. Yawn. Litigators are the hired guns of the legal profession. You can't tell much about a litigator's views on policy issues from who they have litigated for. Before the RIAA, she was a litigator at a private firm. Before that she worked at the DOJ working on civil rights cases. Before that she was a clerk for a Court of Appeal judge. Before that she was editor of the Columbia Law Review. The main reasons a litigator would typically jump from a private law firm to an in-house position would be (1) more frequent or challenging cases, and (2) money.
- danso 14y ago
  > He quotes a part of the copyright law that is giving examples of the kind of things that might be fair use, and then cuts it off before it gets to the part where it lists factors to be considered when deciding if a particular use is fair use. He seems to think that anything that falls under the examples is automatically fair use. This is a frequent misunderstanding...and one that seems to keep escaping TechDirt writers over the years. "Fair" in this case does not mean "noble"...as in, "well, educating inner-city schoolkids is noble, so it's OK for me to torrent the latest Harry Potter movie as part of our fiction reading unit." That may be indeed a noble use, and I bet you could get any number of people/companies to donate you the DVD for it, but it's not a "fair use."
- Natsu 14y ago
  I'm not sure it qualifies as "xenophobia" per se (i.e. "intense or irrational dislike or fear of people from other countries"). The point seems to be that the politicians are acting against the interests of their own, American constituents, not attempting to incite an irrational, automatic mistrust of foreigners. Also, usually, xenophobia is directed at people, not companies. But I suppose that can be a blurry distinction where law is concerned :) You are quite fair to point out that we don't know exactly what they will say yet. Ironically, when we do know, it will be far too late for outrage to change things. Finally, I should point out that way back at the start of Obama's administration, there was an influx of litigators going from the RIAA to the DOJ. I believe you can find posts by one Ray Beckerman on that subject if you look for them and people have been noticing a trend ever since. I think people became more sensitive to the politics of hiring people at the DOJ after all the Bush-era controversies over that. EDIT: Found one of the articles. Here's a post about that issue from 2009 - http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2009/04/another-riaa-lawyer-goes-to-doj.html http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2009/04/anothe... From that article: "[Ed. note. I now know of 6 RIAA lawyers who have joined the Justice Department under the new administration. Under the law, these lawyers are all recused from involvement in any matter involving the RIAA or EMI, Vivendi Universal, SONY BMG, or Warner Bros Records. -R.B.]"

by zzzeek 14y ago

for those of us just following along from home, care to provide some specifics, the nature of the fair use misunderstanding, and where xenophobia, conspiracy theories reside in this article ?

tzs 14y ago

He quotes a part of the copyright law that is giving examples of the kind of things that might be fair use, and then cuts it off before it gets to the part where it lists factors to be considered when deciding if a particular use is fair use. He seems to think that anything that falls under the examples is automatically fair use. The xenophobia comes from the several needless mentions of the fact that some of the publishers are foreign owned. The conspiracy theory stuff comes from the part about someone who once worked for the RIAA now being at the Copyright Office. If you follow the links, you find that the former RIAA person was a litigator for the RIAA. Yawn. Litigators are the hired guns of the legal profession. You can't tell much about a litigator's views on policy issues from who they have litigated for. Before the RIAA, she was a litigator at a private firm. Before that she worked at the DOJ working on civil rights cases. Before that she was a clerk for a Court of Appeal judge. Before that she was editor of the Columbia Law Review. The main reasons a litigator would typically jump from a private law firm to an in-house position would be (1) more frequent or challenging cases, and (2) money.

danso 14y ago
> He quotes a part of the copyright law that is giving examples of the kind of things that might be fair use, and then cuts it off before it gets to the part where it lists factors to be considered when deciding if a particular use is fair use. He seems to think that anything that falls under the examples is automatically fair use. This is a frequent misunderstanding...and one that seems to keep escaping TechDirt writers over the years. "Fair" in this case does not mean "noble"...as in, "well, educating inner-city schoolkids is noble, so it's OK for me to torrent the latest Harry Potter movie as part of our fiction reading unit." That may be indeed a noble use, and I bet you could get any number of people/companies to donate you the DVD for it, but it's not a "fair use."
Natsu 14y ago
I'm not sure it qualifies as "xenophobia" per se (i.e. "intense or irrational dislike or fear of people from other countries"). The point seems to be that the politicians are acting against the interests of their own, American constituents, not attempting to incite an irrational, automatic mistrust of foreigners. Also, usually, xenophobia is directed at people, not companies. But I suppose that can be a blurry distinction where law is concerned :) You are quite fair to point out that we don't know exactly what they will say yet. Ironically, when we do know, it will be far too late for outrage to change things. Finally, I should point out that way back at the start of Obama's administration, there was an influx of litigators going from the RIAA to the DOJ. I believe you can find posts by one Ray Beckerman on that subject if you look for them and people have been noticing a trend ever since. I think people became more sensitive to the politics of hiring people at the DOJ after all the Bush-era controversies over that. EDIT: Found one of the articles. Here's a post about that issue from 2009 - http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2009/04/another-riaa-lawyer-goes-to-doj.html http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2009/04/anothe... From that article: "[Ed. note. I now know of 6 RIAA lawyers who have joined the Justice Department under the new administration. Under the law, these lawyers are all recused from involvement in any matter involving the RIAA or EMI, Vivendi Universal, SONY BMG, or Warner Bros Records. -R.B.]"