Forum - View topicNEWS: U.S. Copyright Office Rules on Infringement Exemptions
|
Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Kougeru
 Posts: 5528 |
|
|||||
|
that timeshifting thing is pretty lame..
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
configspace
Posts: 3717 |
|
|||||
|
^ Thing is we don't know until it's challenged and the SC rules on it, since at present this change--which comes from the Library of Congress--already conflicts with past ruling
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Mune
Posts: 376 Location: Minnesota |
|
|||||
So, AMVs are now legal? |
||||||
|
||||||
Kikaioh
 Posts: 1205 Location: Antarctica |
|
|||||
I would think the "Music" part of an AMV would still be illegal, since AMVs often use the entirety of a copyrighted track as opposed to the "short portions" that seem allowed for here. |
||||||
|
||||||
EpicLotus
 Posts: 187 |
|
|||||
|
Time-shifting is still fair use. You just can't crack a DVD to do it. DVR machines are not suddenly violations of copyright.
|
||||||
|
||||||
Ojamajo LimePie
 Posts: 766 |
|
|||||
And the footage used for AMVs is usually obtained by cracking DVDs or Blu-rays, so that part isn't in the clear either. |
||||||
|
||||||
Cecilthedarkknight_234
 Posts: 3820 Location: Louisville, KY |
|
|||||
I still don't see why not, you buy the damn product you should be able to do what ever you want to with it. |
||||||
|
||||||
Juno016
 Posts: 2387 |
|
|||||
You're buying the product, but not the rights to own the content on the product. You're just buying something that allows you to view it as many times as you want on your own. That's how it has been for a long time now. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Cecilthedarkknight_234
Posts: 3820 Location: Louisville, KY |
|
|||||
I'm aware of that, i'm also a consumer who showed his support for a product. Maybe i'm old impassioned here but I do not like re-buy digital copies from iTunes or other outlets when I can make them myself for my own personal use. Another thing is having a nephew that loves dragon ball z, naruto or other shonen shows.. there is no way I'm going to let a 7 year old handle my dvd's. So I make backups/copies leaving my collection safe/sound I don't find a problem with this. |
||||||
|
||||||
Sunday Silence
 Posts: 2047 |
|
|||||
Or you just buy a shitty $5 VCR at a yard sale with cables, some blank VHS tapes at the thrift store, and do it that way. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Juno016
Posts: 2387 |
|
|||||
The rules/laws are there to prevent/discourage worse things from happening, so it's not like they don't have precedence behind them. I'm pretty sure most of the people the authorities focus on catching are those who do exactly what they're trying to prevent. Not that it's no longer illegal if you have a reasoning behind it. |
||||||
|
||||||
mgosdin
 Posts: 1302 Location: Kissimmee, Florida, USA |
|
|||||
|
"Laws exist to make you think before you break them." - Sir Terry Pratchett, Discworld Series.
If Congress, the Court System or any of the Administrative bodies such as the Library of Congress make rules or legislation that the majority of the citizenry of the US won't obey they simple will break themselves and diminish overall respect for the Law. I.E., people stop taking time to think before breaking the Rules / Law. ( See Eighteenth and Twenty First Amendments to the United States Constitution regarding Prohibition of Alcohol for a classic example. Also, the current "War on Drugs". ) We are still shaking out how modern technology impacts creative endeavors, their creators and consumers. Likely with the rate of technology change any answers our governmental institutions can arrive at will be obsolete before they can be put in place. Mark Gosdin |
||||||
|
||||||
hikaru004
 Posts: 2306 |
|
|||||
I would think now the opposite. AMVs are for entertainment and competition, not criticism or comment. Also you circumvented the copyright protection to obtain the footage. Prob only way it's legal if it's for a class or if you had permission from the copyrights owners. |
||||||
|
||||||
Mr. sickVisionz
 Posts: 2173 |
|
|||||
Why would it be the opposite? The new ruling specifically says for remix/mashup videos which is exactly what an AMV is. Heck, they even allow it for reasons as ambiguous as "commenting." It sounds like they specifically took how people use YouTube into account when making these rulings. |
||||||
|
||||||
TheAncientOne
 Posts: 1871 Location: USA (mid-south) |
|
|||||
|
If anyone is relying on the rulings, rather than simply reading about them in interest, it would be best to examine the actual rulings, rather than rely on a brief article that is based on summarized interpretation by yet another news source.
The original rulings (69 pages): https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2012-26308.pdf The good news is that if you simply wish to review the exemptions themselves, it appears you can start with page 64. The previous pages appear to be an explanation of what was proposed, and the explanation of the reasoning behind what was accepted and rejected. The claim this would permit video clips to be used in AMV's appears to rely heavily on those being classified as "criticism or comment". |
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group