Slashdot Mirror
Yoko Ono/EMI Suit Exposes Fair Use Flaw
Ian Lamont writes "Yoko Ono and EMI Records have backed down from their suit against the makers of a documentary film who used a 15-second fragment of a John Lennon song — but only after a Stanford Law School group got involved. Even though the use of the clip was clearly Fair Use, the case exposed a huge problem with the doctrine: It's becoming too expensive for people to actually take advantage of what is supposed to be a guaranteed right. Ironically, the song in question was Imagine."
The "makers of a documentary" here is "Ben Stein" and the "documentary" is "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed".
I was actually hoping that Yoko and EMI would win this one.
Would Yoko Ono have sued about this if Michael Moore borrowed that same 15 second clip?
I think not.
It's only OK to "Imagine" a world that believes exactly as you do.
To Copy from One is Plagiarism; To Copy from Many is Research.
Just because you don't want others to retain rights doesn't mean that copyright needs to be limited by anybody other than the creator. If they want to give it away, fine. It's not up to you to decide that they've gotten enough out of it and it should be yours for free now. It's perfectly in your power not to use it or pay for it, but people seem to have issues with that as well....
And they take with them all good things. One day, the only thing that's left of the beatles is that Yoko bitch and her army of lawyers, and that guy with the big nose, whatshisname, Gringo Fart or something.
By then, all music will be banned because record companies failed to find a way to charge people as soon as music hits their ears so they decided to eliminate music entirely.
I don't really care what label you use: "conservative" or "liberal". What I care about is PRO-CHOICE positions, and the Democrats are slowly but surely eroding that freedom of choice. ----- If you want an education, you go to Uncle Sam High. If you want a home, you borrow from Uncle Sam Fannie Mae. If you need to retire, Uncle Sam Eldercare will send you SS checks each month. And if you want healthcare you will (soon) have to go to Uncle Sam General.
Where's the choice in that??? It's a monopoly, and you can not have true freedom in a monopoly.
I also object to the Democrats' love for raiding my neighbors' wallets, not for the benefit of all, but for a few. The obvious example is the Bail-Out which will collect ~$7000 from 110 million american households in order to give it to a few executives. I was happy when the Republicans rejected the bill the first time.
I'm tired of anti-freedom monopolies. I'm tired of watching politicians raiding wallet, not for everybody's benefit (GENERAL welfare), but to enrich somebody else (welfare for a select few). This is no longer the land of liberty.
Not that the Republicans are much better.
They are merely the better option.
The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
Sure, rights extend to people with whom I disagree - except that in this case, the doctrine of fair use is being misapplied.
See section 17 USC #107, item 2 - the nature of the copyrighted work is in no way related to the nutcase belief in ID, so an ID propaganda film should have no fair use defense in this case.
Thanks for the child porn strawman, BTW.
One swallow does not a fellatrix make
I don't see the relevance of the 1st Amendment here - you're obviously a twat of CR Culver proportions, and deserve to be ignored if I could be arsed.
I'm surprised a clueless ID cunt like you could even read the Copyright act, let alone pen such a long response.
OK - if the 'fair use' defense is criticism, then I stand corrected, but you're still a cunt and so are all your co-religionists.
Oh, and I burn karma to stay warm, so thankyou and goodbye :-)
One swallow does not a fellatrix make