Copyright and Fair Use

[iRadiatedBox]

if i had permission can i use unlimited amount of the copyrighted material ?

[BlueDragonFuze]

@RontheHybrid They could take the video down for the Disney clips. If you saw the end credits, it's says the song was used with permission, so it's fine.

[demonhell4]

Next u will need (licence,CopyRight,Lease,Tax) for your soul, mind, body, or to just To live life, Big Brother What you.So DOSE Yuri From red alert 2

[tappakeggaday1]

tell that to the band men at work with the song down under

[tr9000]

@tappakeggaday1 Kookaburra, the song the flute part was allegedly copying was owned by someone else when the song was made, the new owner gained the rights to the song like 8 years after Down Under was released, and sued the record label 28 years after the initial release of the song. The Verve had something similar happen with The Rolling Stones, they had a license to use a song sample, made too much money and was sued for using "too much of the song" breaking copyright. 50/50 deal became 100/0

[tappakeggaday1]

@tr9000 8 years after down under?seems like the judge should have said man that boat already sailed and you should have jumped on it sooner.maybe one to two years after the down under song was released.if someone had an accident on your property they have three years to file suit against the person who owned the property and that bodily damages.laws for copyright should be much shorter than that.

[tr9000]

@tappakeggaday1 I'm sorry it seems I should have been more clear with what i said, the man is suing Men at work 28 years after the song was released, but he himself only owned the rights for tKookaburra for about 20 years getting it after the original owner died.

[tappakeggaday1]

@tr9000 I see what your saying,but think in terms of damage,if a person got killed in an airplane accident the cap amount they could sue for would be 100k for wrongful death.millions if they survived.was it worth that much?dont think so< i only paid 2.99 for my 45 when it came out.then again with the "mixed tapes"i guess i could have gotten it off the radio for free.the new owner of the song didnt create it so i really dont think he should have been compensated so heavily for it.

[RontheHybrid]

So what if the material is partially copyrighted, like the audio (music), but all video content was hand created by you? Can they take down your video, or just remove their audio, cause technically it's not their video, only their audio?

[TONYE17]

it would be ironic if youtube took this down because it's disney lol.... great job .

[weena001]

this is so funny!! Brilliant!! 

[BeastingIt]

Fucking brilliant.

[spliter88]

how deliciously ironical having the disney characters explain the copyright and public domain.

[robertsmetek]

It's called the "Empire of the Mouse" for a reason

[myheartfellappart]

its nice, but it would been more understandable if they put captions on it....

[henkman00]

uhm....very clever. but i wish this was with a normal speaker

[Bobzeaux]

I got lost too. *lol*

[smartcoco]

Brilliant!!!

[119matburn]

holy crap that was good mostly made scenc

[thewarrior46]

This must have taken you FOREVER to make....good vid

[Vamavid]

OH THE IRONY! Good one. :-)

[pytofchitown]

it goes on a bit too long, but I think it's a creative use of disney clips.

[EasyAttitude]

Disney is adamant in the protection of their work. If your choice comes down to paying a copyright lawyer $250 an hour to defend this versus removing the video, which would you choose?

[fuhgidabowditt]

PERFECT!!!

[pratt123]

The majority of copyright claims are enforced without considering fair use since no one bothers to file a counterclaim to claim fair use of the copyrighted material.

Hence copyrights are vastly abused and overused at the expense of YouTube, the Internet, and the public.

[ONVPodcast]

The argument would then be that Youtube makes profit off of user created content thus the original owner of a copyright will win by technicality. Fair Use practically doesn't apply on Youtube.  At least that's how I've always seen it.

--Nick

[pratt123]

maybe but I was specifically referring to the fact that Youtube blocks videos at the request of copyright holders without considering the Fair Use principle at all.

Fair use would apply to most of the videos on YouTube but the company doesn't force the holders to determine if there is fair use at work in the video. (which there is about 99% of the time)

[ONVPodcast]

I still think the copyright holders have more power here though. Youtube still makes profit based on user created content thus nullifying Fair Use.

No matter what you do to copyrighted footage it isn't yours. Fan music videos and parodies are all technically illegal.

I agree Fair Use is definitely not considered but that's because the copyright holders win by technicality.

--Nick

[pratt123]

not true, recently in a court case (can't remember where but you can find it on Wikipedia under Youtube controversies), the judge ruled that parodies, music videos, brief clips, etc that make up most of Youtube does constitute fair use and thus the copyright holder can not take down the video.

So yes, the burden of proof currently is on the supposed violator but if judges examine the law carefully, then fair use is much more powerful for Youtube than it seems at the moment. Lets unlock that.

[ONVPodcast]

I've never heard that case mentioned but I'm glad you did. The thing to pay attention to in Lenz v. Universal is that the copyrighted material was only 29 seconds long. And it should also be noted that that was only carried out by a district judge but apparently Universal isn't allowed to appeal. It looks like this needs another case to go to the Supreme Court if it's filed under a First Amendment case as well as a copyright case.

Thanks for the info!

--Nick

[saturnhexagon]

Hopeful, so how is this video not in violation of copyright law when you show snippets of the collective works of Disney Pictures? Millions of copyright ripoffs are on Youtube, yet they do nothing about it. It's either all right or it's all wrong. Or is this not a problem now in June 2008?

[teamuny]

its not a vialation... because of the FAIR USE thingy. the clips were used to teach us all about copyright stuff... so its fair.

[pratt123]

make sure that if they do try to take this video down, you file a counterclaim that states a fair use principle.

[zymethpwn]

@teamuny It's also a parody! so it's doubly fair.

[CodenameLegacy]

OMG that was brilliant! Is is true that Fair use almost supports the limitations of legal rights to borrowing certain copyright materials such as news, parodies and comments? Does it mean it's still censorship in a an ellaborated system of control?

[angiemation]

Wow that was great!=D

[orkidfan]

Ah! Perfect! I'm glad I'm not the only one trying to explain Fair Use. Thank you a huge heap for creating this! Great job, and very funny!

[mystykit]

Fantastic work! Thanx for posting this.