RE: [Videolib] Eyes on the Prize

Jed Horovitz (
Thu, 27 Jan 2005 14:05:12 -0500

OK, I just can't stay out of this. Jessica is correct in general although
she miss-speaks in the particular. INFRINGING is not ILLEGAL. It is a
cause for civil action. It will not get you thrown in jail or fined by the
government. It may get you sued. You may win.

My understanding is that the film maker/copyright owner of the program is
just as trapped by this particular situation as the public. The rights
holder stopping this release is the estate of songwriters long dead whose
work was performed 'in reality' and captured by documentarians. That the
songwriter's assigns should have the power to stop this work from being
shown is absurd. It was/is clearly a fair use of the song.

I don't think anyone is saying that the public performance of the video work
is not potentially infringing but rather that if the owner of the work
and/or broadcasters are too intimidated to stand up for their own fair use
right, they may be forfeiting their control over the work because the public
has a right to see it. Why? Because it was published with copyright
protection that we honored. In exchange, we get access.

Jessica, this is about protecting the film maker (and future film makers
right to tell the truth about the world as it is/was) and the public's right
to see the film maker's published work that is now part of the historical


-----Original Message-----
[]On Behalf Of Jessica
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: [Videolib] Eyes on the Prize

I don't even want to touch who gets to decide why EYES ON THE PRIZE is more
but to the last point. Downloading of a copyrighted work without permission
is illegal PERIOD. According to the group( with the occasional dissenter)
you can make a VHS copy from another LEGAL VHS copy IF you owned a copy and
it is not lost stolen or damaged.

> From: "Griest, Bryan" <>
> Reply-To:
> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 09:31:35 -0800
> To: "''" <>
> Subject: RE: [Videolib] Eyes on the Prize
> In reaction to Jessica's piece, I would argue that "Eyes on the Prize"
> indeed be of such special social significance as to merit special
> along these lines. (Comparing it to "Song of the South" is both cruel and
> ironic, of course.) A work so universally lauded is exactly the kind of
> we need to take a stand for, regardless of the justification cited by the
> provider. Whether the provider wants to claim it or not, downolading
> should be viewed as an act of civil disobedience by those who believe (as
> obviously do) that the copyright laws are out of whack. In addition, since
> my library already owned a copy of it, couldn't I also make the claim that
> am making a legitimate (according to most of the participants of the
> thread) replacement/archival copy from our deteriorating/stolen tapes
> anyway?
> Bryan Griest
> Glendale Public Library
> _______________________________________________
> Videolib mailing list

Videolib mailing list

Videolib mailing list