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."

Comments

Re:So sue to recover the losses

[Corporate Troll]

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.

Conservative Flim == SUE

[Mr. Droopy Drawers]

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.

Re:So sue to recover the losses

[electrictroy]

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.

Re:So sue to recover the losses

[aproposofwhat]

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.