Your situation of not being able to LOCATE a rights holder has no relation
to "Fair Use'.
I don't think much is served going over this again and again but I just
wanted people to understand my frustration when groups try to claim
everything from "Fair Use" to "Educational Exemption" to use our films in
Public settings. It has really become a nightmare
On 6/2/06 8:39 AM, "Rick Provine" <email@example.com> wrote:
> ¡°Transformative¡± is merely one consideration of the first test of Fair Use,
> ¡°The Purpose and Character of your use.¡± Transformative, in and of itself,
> does not make or break a fair use case, though the law favors it. All four
> factors must be weighed.
> Fair Use is not intended to address any real specific instance, not deny any
> specific use. It merely recognizes that there will be acceptable uses of
> copyrighted material without permission or payment.
> I agree with Gary¡¦this does not mean ¡°open season¡± on copyright or rights
> holders. But it does mean that progress can still be made in the absence of a
> workable system. Fair use is claimed on entire works all of the time (see
> Reserve Reading).
> Certainly in practice, the use of an entire work is more difficult to get past
> the four factors. But, it is NOT excluded by statute. Fair use is
> deliberately vague to allow for interpretation.
> Rick Provine
> Director of Libraries
> and Associate CIO for Library
> & Information Services
> DePauw University
> 11 East Larabee Street
> Greencastle, IN 46135
> office 765-658-4435
> mobile 765-301-0262
> fax 765-658-4445
>>>> firstname.lastname@example.org 06/01/06 7:07 PM >>>
> Ok Gary then tell me why in the entire history of FU has it ALWAYS been
> legally interpreted as being right to INCORPORATE something into another
> The legal term is in fact ©øtransformative©÷ FU has in every case been used as
> right to TRANSFORM or USE something IN ANOTHER WORK
> So to use clips, quotes etc IN ANOTHER work. It has never ever been used to
> allow a COMPLETE work by itself so yes in this case you are just making up
> law. I don©öt think even the most copyright hating lawyer/ artist would EVER
> That ©øfair use©÷ can EVER and I mean ever be justified as a way of showing a
> complete work under copyright
> Find me any instance where this has been done or argued.
> I will if you like get you quotes from ©øfair use©÷ cases which refer to is
> ©øtransformative©÷ nature
> Seriously you KNOW that ©øfair use©÷ is intended and has developed as
> limited right under certain circumstances to use
> An otherwise copyrighted work as PART of another work.
> Other than WANTING it to be otherwise and because frankly it sound nice , I
> mean gee this should be
> ©øFair©÷ right ? How can you justify this.
> Also going back as I seem to be the only one who wants to to the ORIGINAL
> question , what the ©øF©÷ would ©øFair use©÷ have to do
> With showing this film ? The question was if you can©öt basically afford to
> track down a difficult to locate copyright holder , can you show the film
> anyway? So please explain how this is remot
> VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues
> relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control,
> preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and
> related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective
> working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication
> between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and
Proud Resident of a BLUE STATE
333 W 39th St. 503
NY NY 10018
VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.