Some Thoughts on Copyright

[Lennart Sorensen]

On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 09:59:56PM -0400, Stephen wrote:
> The copyright debate has been interesting, but clearly polarized. Most 
> here are on the ?fair use? side.
> 
> But what, really, is fair use?
> 
> On a mailing list I subscribe to, someone posted a link to a video on 
> You tube. The video was made by someone who took slices of Star Trek 
> video and put them in a sequence that went well with a Jefferson 
> Airplane song, White Rabbit.
> 
> I posted that this was a violation of copyright, but the OP claimed it 
> was ?fair use? and posted a link to a definition of fair use.
> 
> I called them on it, quoting from the site they linked to. Fair use is 
> limited to using small portions of a copyrighted work, for the purpose 
> of a review and other specific uses.

Certainly by the examples I have seen in the past, I would think that
probably is fair use.  Now if they used the whole song, that would be a
violation, but using small clips of the tv show sounds like fair use.

> When I was in university, 35 years ago, we were given a photocopy of a 
> book. And not a text book.
> 
> Is that considered ?fair use??

No, but on the other hand universities sometimes buy the right to
duplicate a book that is not in print at the time, which may be what had
happened.

> Many people have the opinion that if they buy something, they have the 
> right to use what they buy in any way that they please.

For personal use I would say they are right.  If they start to give away
or sell things based on it, that's a different issue.

> Now, I am a serious photographer. I hope to someday sell my photographs. 
> Would a buyer of one of my photographs have the ?right? to scan the 
> photograph into digital form, and do some digital manipulation to it, 
> then post it to a web site?

I would think that depends just how much of the original image they use.
Fair use gets tricky in those grey areas.

> I have sold the photograph. I have retained copyright.
> 
> Does the buyer have the ?right? to make a ?backup? copy of the photograph?

Yes they do have a right to make a backup copy to store somewhere safe.
At elast they should.

Of course if you are willing to give them a replacement at no more than
cost if they ever break the copy they paid you for, then they may prefer
that since your copies are probably better quality than their backups in
many cases.

Fair use is tricky.  The one thing I don't think is tricky is that use
of a copyrighted item should be allowed for personal use.  So if I want
to use it on my device then I should be allowed to do that, no matter
what kind of conversion I may have to perform on the item to do so.  But
only for my own use.  Of course sometimes it is more convinient to go
buy another copy of something in a different format (like buying a CD
for those 78s you have and have trouble playing and converting), but in
cases where the desired format can't be bought (and even if it can) I
should be allowed to do the conversion so I can use it.

-- 
Len Sorensen
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists