Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Lawmaker Revs Up Fair-Use Crusade

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the might-he-be-on-our-side dept.

peipas writes "Wired News has posted an interview with Rep. Rick Boucher (D-VA). In it he defends his stance in support of fair use and against the DMCA and other measures sought by the entertainment industry. The interview also touches on universal broadband and the recent overturning of the broadcast flag."

4 of 254 comments (clear)

  1. Boucher is not our hero... by kajoob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is the guy that wants to trade the broadcast flag for our fair use rights. Our representatives shouldn't be trading one set of our rights in order to keep a right we already have. Fair use means nothing if everything is controlled with a broadcast flag and there is nothing for us to share.

    --
    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur
    1. Re:Boucher is not our hero... by kajoob · · Score: 5, Informative
      It actually amuses me the extent Fair Use is misunderstood on slashdot


      Yeah me too, so let me point out where you have an almost criminal misunderstanding as to what fair use is...

      You do realise that 'Fair Use' rarely if ever extends to sharing copyrighted material that you dont own copyright to?


      No I didn't realize that, but that may be because Fair Use rights only come into play when you don't own the copyright!! Fair Use is when you use a copyrighted work without having to ask permission from the copyright owner.

      You can cite statutes all you want, but unless you know the case law behind it, you don't know what it has been interpreted to mean. For instance, did you know that the Supreme Court has held that "any individual may reproduce a copyrighted work for a 'fair use;' the copyright owner does not possess the exclusive right to such a use." SONY CORP. OF AMER. v. UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC., 464 US 417 (1984).? I can tell that you didn't.

      The 1961 Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law cites examples of activities that courts have regarded as fair use:


      Did you even read what you cited? That is a list of "EXAMPLES", and the list is not exclusive. Again, if you did any research you'd find that there is no exhaustive list for "fair uses" nor is there any bright line test for what constitutes fair use. The factor that has the most weight to ascertain whether or not a use is a fair use is "was it for commercial purposes?". That's the biggy, so if you're using it for personal use (does that include sharing? we don't know yet) then it is more likely that your use is non-infringing, but even that is not dispositive.

      So basically, unless its incidental or judicial in some fashion, Fair Use has generally been found to be not applicable to the entire item, only excerpts or quotations, and rarely the whole content.


      OK, you just contradicted yourself. You said previously that you can't copy an entire work without infringing, but now you say that Fair Use has only been generally (read: not entirely) applicable to copies of whole works? As I said before, there is no bright line test for what is inringing or non-infringing, but it is entirely legal to copy an entire cd under the doctrine of fair use. Will saving a television show and sending it to Aunt Sally fall under the auspices of "fair use"? I don't know because the case isn't in front of me, but I do know that you are completely off-base to that unequivocally that doing so is an abolute infringing act.

      I don't mean to sound harsh, but the next time you try to slap someone down, make sure your facts are correct and that you indeed know what you are talking about.
      --
      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur
  2. I made Fair Use of my friend's girlfriend... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...and he's still pissed at me. I don't see what the problem is. I only used her for one night while he was at a family dinner, I did not intend to permanently deprive him of use of her, and she still loves him and everything.

    But he's still all hung up about the whole issue. Jeez, some people are so narrow-minded. Guy's as bad as the RIAA. I guess I should be glad he isn't litigating.

  3. Re:A reversal in the Democratic and Republican rol by demaria · · Score: 5, Informative

    "I sure as hell dont remember hearing about the republican party being particularly active protecting civil rights of disenfranchised minorities during the sixties"

    Civil Rights Act of 1964:
    House Republicans 138-34
    House Democrats 152-96
    Senate Republicans: 6 against
    Senate Democrats: 21 against

    Voting Rights Act of 1965
    Senate Democrats: 47-17
    Senate Republicans: 30-2

    Civil rights Act of 1968
    Senate Democrats: 42-17
    Senate Republicans: 29-3