My apologies if you have covered this before but I am genuinely unclear
on your position on this.
-- Jessica Rosner Kino International 333 W 39th St. 503 NY NY 10018 firstname.lastname@example.org 212-629-6880
> From: "Jed Horovitz" <JedH@internetvideoarchive.com> > Reply-To: email@example.com > Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 14:26:40 -0400 > To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> > Subject: RE: [Videolib] Public performance rights question > > I don't think you can propose it to be a rip off and still have an argument. > If you can't have an arguement, you don't have a free society. That is my > point. The only thing we know about this Hegelian t-shirt is, it exits. If > it is a rip-off, it should be Disney's job to prove it to a jury rather than > to assume it is a rip-off simply because it is a copy. If it is judged to > be a rip-off than it should be Disney's job to show the damages. Then they > can ask for damages and court costs. This is how we treat all other forms > of property. (The only reason movies (etc.) are different is the lobbying > done by the MPAA, RIAA, AAP, etc.) The ownership of this super property has > created super citizens...most of them with articles of incorporation instead > of bodies and souls. > Jed > 'If you give someone a big stick, they are going to use it.' Ed Felton > > -----Original Message----- > From: email@example.com > [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of Syp, Marc P. > Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 1:31 PM > To: 'VideoLib' > Subject: RE: [Videolib] Public performance rights question > > > > I didn't *assume* that the Mickey t-shirt was simply a rip-off, I proposed > it to *be* a rip-off in the context of making an argument. Have you seen > the shirt I was talking about? I didn't think so, because I made it up in > my head. But here's what it looks like: A t-shirt with a simple, standard, > copyrighted drawing of Mickey with no ironic, artistic, or political > adjustment implied. > > Of course, I'm just waiting for you to say that simply the act of creating > and selling a Mickey Mouse rip off is an artistic and political statement > and therefore should be excepted from copyright law... heheh. > > Okay, sorry, folks... it's been just too tantalizing and I had to get my > teeth into it too. But I'm done now! > > > Thanks, > Marc Syp > Supervisor, Film Library > St. Louis Public Library > 314.206.6704 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jed Horovitz [mailto:JedH@internetvideoarchive.com] > Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 11:56 AM > To: Syp, Marc P.; email@example.com > Subject: RE: [Videolib] Public performance rights question > > > Marc, > > Your example exhibits the prejudice I am concerned with in that you assume > the t-shirt is not a political, artistic statement but simply a rip off. I > think we should assume it is protected free speech (art, business, pursuit > of happiness, etc.) unless and until Disney proves other wise. That is all > it would take to level the playing field between new/future users/creators > and owners of existing creations. > > Jed > > _______________________________________________ > Videolib mailing list > Videolib@library.berkeley.edu > http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/videolib > > _______________________________________________ > Videolib mailing list > Videolib@library.berkeley.edu > http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/videolib