The Copyright Act & "Fair Use" Doctrine

Hello there everyone! Since it has come up numerous times over the course of the board's history, I thought I might be of some assistance in helping with the little tape-trading quandary we seem to have established. In not-so-simple form, but certainly the best expressed (for law), the Copyright Act (specifically §107 [17 U.S.C. 107]) states that:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 106 and 106A [dealing with the exclusive rights of the copyright owner], the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include--

1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
3) the amount and substantiability of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."

Out of all the points of the Act, #4 has been deemed to be the most critical by most. Basically, copying something for a review, for example, is perfectly within the law, but this may be stretched when it begins to hamper the copyright-holder's market (ripping and then selling a substantial amount of compact discs is a good example - looking recently at the KaZaA crackdown, the RIAA has stated that it is only looking into users with clearly enormous file caches without regard to any discriminable factors such as age).

Also, if the copyrighted work (with the exception of, in this case, DVD or VHS material - not including telecasts) does not serve to advance the bearer monetarily, and serves to aid the general public or a select group in some way (this is broad-based), then it is not infringement. Take, for example, if I were to - using my puppets - perform to a Fraggle soundtrack to show my expertise at syncing and expression, and were to do this to send to the Jim Henson Company in Los Angeles. This act would not be infringement, because it does not serve to benefit me monetarily, and only exists to exhibit to the JHC certain characteristics of my puppetry resumé. Also, since I am freely handing over ownership of the material once it is out of my hands to the JHC, then - since it was JHC material - I am henceforth running the process in a circle. Nothing lost, nothing gained (except, hopefully, a position at Henson for myself...ha ha!). So basically, that sums up the law side of it pretty neatly, although debate does still rage as to the broadness of certain statements and how they apply, and I think that I've added my little kernel of insight into this issue. I'll be off then everyone! And thanks Buck, for your continuous commenting on this issue!

>Adam

Oh, and by the way, the reason I excluded pre-recorded DVD and VHS tapes from the list was simply because the literal masking on the DVD and/or VHS states that the material IS NOT to be copied (DVD's moreso the case). Telecasts do not always carry this feature, and VHS, while this is generally applied, include the option to copy for personal use based on the Act above and subsequent qualifications. Hope I could be of some assistance to you all!

Addendum on Trading in Particular

I might also add then, that trading is legal, providing it falls within the guidelines in the above post. Trading for purposes of developing material to cyclically run to the copyright owner (audition tapes, for example, from copyrighted A/V footage) is perfectly within acceptable standards, within exception (remember, I said "broad based?"). There's always someone who will extrapolate the law to read as he or she sees fit, therefore, law-based exceptions through the factors of Fair Use have arisen. I won't take time to cite cases, as this is not a law board, but I will say that if you have to think very hard to figure out whether or not it is a violation, you are probably in violation - and if not, there are exceptions to Fair Use. Just thought I'd end with that. People endlessly have a desire to justify, and unjustifiable grounds are, as the saying goes, like a house on the sand. Thanks again.

>Adam

This board is starting to sound like a courtroom, even worse a courtroom going through the law book. First off anybody reading this, check the Tape Dubbing post for my opnions on this matter. But to sum it up, Do what you want, just don't get caught. Normally I wouldn't say this, but these copyright stuff is not a serious enough offence or matter to warrent much worry. I copy cds, sell the orginals on ebay, I copy tapes and give people copies, I download music from Kazaa and Piolet, But I don't make any money off this copying. I don;t think that stuff deserves any legal action plain and simple. You can do that stuff, just in moderationa and use your descretion. Don't go overboard and don't do it to make money and you'll be ok. There's no "Copyright Team" going door to door checking to see if you violated any copyright laws. So you'll be ok, just don't sownload 2.00 songs on Kazaa, or you might not be ok, but otherwise, nothing will happen if you keep it to yourself and don't make money off of it.

dmx10101 said:

So you'll be ok, just don't sownload 2.00 songs on Kazaa, or you might not be ok, but otherwise, nothing will happen if you keep it to yourself and don't make money off of it.

Click to expand...

...tell that to the 12-year-old the RIAA busted, man...you're right. Go ahead and live a lie, as long as it's an unreported lie. Nice job incriminating yourself and your opinion of the law (as opposed to the FACTS in my earlier posting). I'll say off the record that I know where you're coming from, but I don't blatantly stick my neck out and say precisely what I do NOR would I be assinine to think that I could just naively dismiss the law as folly. Sure, you may not have people rushing your house over this, but - as you so smartly and eloquently said earlier - paraphrasing, "it only depends on your morals and what you believe in." We aren't law breakers, but we also wouldn't want to make ourselves out to be with stark comments such as that. Ouch. Slapped yourself in the face man...I'm only stating the facts compounded by your own reporting. No negativity intended.

>Adam

In addition to however you see the legal side by using the forum here to trade you also have to abide by the forum rules. Both the people running the forum and the people using it obviously all support the work of the Henson company so selling for profit, and trading any kind of commercially available Henson programmes is usually not allowed here which i'm sure the moderators could tell you more about.

Just as a FYI, if you ever were to use a Fraggle tape to lip-synch to and send to Henson as a demo it would be thrown in the trash immediately. They don't like people using clone 'Muppet' puppets or any copyrighted material at all in auditions and things.

Right. They want a 30 second video of original puppetry, including the puppet and the performance.

When I ever DO get a hold of a video tape, I'll do the 30 second deal; THEN I'll add on all the other stuff Muley does downtown with his "Mule on the Street" conversations.

Cool! Thanks for the information Luke - I appreciate it!

I wasn't intending to turn the whole thread nuts, I was just originally trying to get something down in stone from the books on the actual Copyright Act itself. I know we all here support Jim's work and the Company, I really do...no harm was intended by my posting this thread whatsoever. If I did step out of line, then I apologise for doing so.

And thanks for digging up the criteria for the puppeteering submissions at Henson...to be honest, I never would have known they would have thrown them in the trash (Well, actually, I kinda knew that if it was ALL just synced stuff of previously done material then it wouldn't get you as far as the trash bin)...Either way, they are indeed good practise for sync, and doing so would help you prepare for when you record the 30 second spot of original material. Thanks for the research there, Luke! Problem solved for me.

BTW, it IS fun though, isn't it (to sync to songs, I mean)?


Thanks, and again, if I offended some in my start to this thread, I wholeheartedly apologise.

>Adam

PukkaPukka said:

I know we all here support Jim's work and the Company

Click to expand...

Heck, I'd buy anything they released on dvd.

PukkaPukka said:

BTW, it IS fun though, isn't it (to sync to songs, I mean)?

Click to expand...

Yes.

PukkaPukka said:

Thanks, and again, if I offended some in my start to this thread, I wholeheartedly apologise.

Click to expand...

How would what you've said be offensive? I don't see it.

jediX said:

How would what you've said be offensive? I don't see it.

Click to expand...

Well, I do kinda see the irony in my last major comment sorta attacking DMX about being assinine to think he knows the law when I pulled it straight from the source...I was, myself, assinine in the way I attacked his comments. I shouldn't have put it quite that way in response. Sarcasm hurts.

(and thanks Luke for bringing me to my senses...)

>Adam

There should be warnings against posting at 1 in the morning, heh. I've posted some pretty weird stuff before at that time lol