Fond of uploading your funny video mash-ups to YouTube? More often than not, your video may be flagged for copyright infringement if you are using a famous person’s music video, even if it’s within the realm of fair use (see summary from the article below*). Here is a cautionary tale by Emily Hong courtesy of Future Tense, a partnership of Slate, New America, and Arizona State University on emerging technologies, public policy, and society.
* “The law gives judges four factors to use to determine whether something is fair use: the purpose and character of use, the nature of the copyrighted work, the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and the effect of the use upon the potential market. However, even with these factors, fair use is controversial, and its boundaries are fuzzy.”
Justin Beiber attends the 2015 American Music Awards, Photo by Valerie Macon/AFP/Getty Images
I made a discovery just before the holidays. If you start Beyoncé’s “Grown Woman” at 0:23 seconds in and simultaneously press play on the music video for Justin Bieber’s “Sorry” (on mute, of course), the Beyoncé audio matches the Bieber choreography nearly perfectly. It is uncanny.
Are you an artist, a professor, or writer? Do you incorporate outside design work into your own to make it unique? That’s legal thanks to the doctrine of fair use, or the copyright laws that make transformative works legal.
Basically, fair use doctrines are exceptions to the copyright law. Because “fair use” is highly subjective, each case needs to be carefully weighted. Stanford University Libraries lists a handful of interesting fair use cases and their outcomes. Below summarizes one of the more contested cases. What do you think?
The painter, Richard Prince, created a collage using — in one collage — 35 images from a photographer’s book. The artist also used 28 of the photos in 29 additional paintings. In some instances the full photograph was used while in others, only the main subject of the photo was used. Important Factors. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals held that to qualify as a transformative use, Prince’s work did not have to comment on the original photographer’s work (or on popular culture). The Court of Appeals concluded that twenty-five of Prince’s artworks qualified as fair use and remanded the case to determine the status of the remaining five artworks. Cariou v. Prince, No. 11-1197 (2d Cir. 2013) VERDICT: FAIR USE
Librarians try to balance the fiscal and spacial convenience of digital resources with the quiet allure of the physical book. We offer both at the library to cater to all needs. Yet recent studies show that students overwhelmingly prefer print. There are many reasons why: distraction, loss of visual memory cues, and the headaches that come from reading on a screen are just some.
Take a look at this Huffington post article and let us know what you think