4 ms·

No professional opinion is needed: The copyright warnings at the beginning of DVDs often state that it is forbidden to perform the work in "restaurants, prison

by sfk 12y ago

No professional opinion is needed: The copyright warnings at the beginning of DVDs often state that it is forbidden to perform the work in "restaurants, prisons, ..." (sometimes they even mention oil rigs).

delinka 12y ago
Copyright warnings at the start of a DVD are not Legal Advice and cannot revoke rights assigned by copyright law to the purchaser/licenser. Besides, that's DVDs and not music; they're licensed differently. Thus, indeed a professional opinion is "needed."
- sfk 12y ago
  This is a silly discussion that distracts from the real issue (humans being tortured), but here you go: https://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/offenders/psipso/psi-2010/psi_2010_01_licences_for_dvd_televison_in_prisons.doc https://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/offenders/psipso/psi-20... "2.1 Showing films on DVD or video to groups of prisoners or staff, either in communal areas or via in cell television systems, is considered to be a public performance for which a licence is required." This is the UK version, be my guest to search for the U.S. equivalent before making any further claims.
  - delinka 12y ago
    No, the entire discussion is about an album that was played "without a license." I'm curious if they have a leg to stand on with their attempt to bill. And again, movie licensing in the US is codified differently into law than music licensing. These licensing issues are not compatible.
- jahewson 12y ago
  No, your rights to use copyrighted content under the law are zero (excluding fair use). There are seven basic rights which are recognised, unless the copyright holder grants you one or more of these, then you are not permitted to use their content. They may add any additional terms to the license which they like, as long as they are legally sound. One dirty trick which is used is to include something like "absolutely no copying" including for "education or personal use", which is not really true, because fair use permits limited copying. So that's an example of a non-legally sound clause. The right to perform a work publicly and restrictions on those public places (e.g. as a studio I could license a work to be played publicly in a specific movie theatre) is one of the seven rights which are built-in to copyright law, so such restrictions are, in fact, sound.
  - morninj 12y ago
    > No, your rights to use copyrighted content under the law are zero (excluding fair use). No, your rights to use copyrighted content under the law are zero (excluding fair use). No. You can "perform" the work as long as the performance is not "public." For instance, watching a DVD on your laptop by yourself at home is a "performance," but it's not public. This is a perfectly valid use of copyrighted content.

by sfk 12y ago

delinka 12y ago

Copyright warnings at the start of a DVD are not Legal Advice and cannot revoke rights assigned by copyright law to the purchaser/licenser. Besides, that's DVDs and not music; they're licensed differently. Thus, indeed a professional opinion is "needed."

sfk 12y ago
This is a silly discussion that distracts from the real issue (humans being tortured), but here you go: https://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/offenders/psipso/psi-2010/psi_2010_01_licences_for_dvd_televison_in_prisons.doc https://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/offenders/psipso/psi-20... "2.1 Showing films on DVD or video to groups of prisoners or staff, either in communal areas or via in cell television systems, is considered to be a public performance for which a licence is required." This is the UK version, be my guest to search for the U.S. equivalent before making any further claims.
- delinka 12y ago
  No, the entire discussion is about an album that was played "without a license." I'm curious if they have a leg to stand on with their attempt to bill. And again, movie licensing in the US is codified differently into law than music licensing. These licensing issues are not compatible.
jahewson 12y ago
No, your rights to use copyrighted content under the law are zero (excluding fair use). There are seven basic rights which are recognised, unless the copyright holder grants you one or more of these, then you are not permitted to use their content. They may add any additional terms to the license which they like, as long as they are legally sound. One dirty trick which is used is to include something like "absolutely no copying" including for "education or personal use", which is not really true, because fair use permits limited copying. So that's an example of a non-legally sound clause. The right to perform a work publicly and restrictions on those public places (e.g. as a studio I could license a work to be played publicly in a specific movie theatre) is one of the seven rights which are built-in to copyright law, so such restrictions are, in fact, sound.
- morninj 12y ago
  > No, your rights to use copyrighted content under the law are zero (excluding fair use). No, your rights to use copyrighted content under the law are zero (excluding fair use). No. You can "perform" the work as long as the performance is not "public." For instance, watching a DVD on your laptop by yourself at home is a "performance," but it's not public. This is a perfectly valid use of copyrighted content.