Slap in the face to the music industry

[Trooper110]

Judge: Copyright Owners Must Consider 'Fair Use' Before Sending Takedown Notice | Threat Level from Wired.com

Every time they do anything now, I swear they just keep making their case worse and worse.....yay!

[Tuck]

Good for this judge. Protecting intellectual property is a good thing, but copyright owners have no right to say the public can't use their works, period.

[mapes]

Good for this judge. Protecting intellectual property is a good thing, but copyright owners have no right to say the public can't use their works, period.

Well it's kinda a slap in the face. The ruling is saying that before a DCMA takedown notice is sent the people who want the takedown need to make sure that fair use is not infringed. IP owners do have a say on how they're property is used if it exceeds fair use.

Here's how they wiegh in on fair use

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

[Trooper110]

Yes, but they also said that if it is "proven" that they issued a DCMA takedown that violates fair use, that the person can then sue them. Although honestly it would probably be easier just to threaten getting a lawyer and have them revoke the takedown.

[Tuck]

Yes, but they also said that if it is "proven" that they issued a DCMA takedown that violates fair use, that the person can then sue them. Although honestly it would probably be easier just to threaten getting a lawyer and have them revoke the takedown.

Lawyers are the reason for this ruling. Apparently many copyright owners are in the habit of threatening everyone who uses their works with legal action, even if they use the smallest of snippets. That places a legal burden on the accused, and intimidates them into compliance just on the prospect of being hauled into court.

This ruling forces them to acknowledge that the fair use of copyrighted works is legal, and copyright owners need to respect that. Kudos to the court.

It's interesting what inspired this: a woman videotaped her kid dancing to the song "Let's Go crazy." The clip was something like 25 seconds long. And yet the copyright owner threatened to sue You Tube if they didn't take the clip down.

[Trooper110]

Lawyers are the reason for this ruling. Apparently many copyright owners are in the habit of threatening everyone who uses their works with legal action, even if they use the smallest of snippets. That places a legal burden on the accused, and intimidates them into compliance just on the prospect of being hauled into court.

This ruling forces them to acknowledge that the fair use of copyrighted works is legal, and copyright owners need to respect that. Kudos to the court.

It's interesting what inspired this: a woman videotaped her kid dancing to the song "Let's Go crazy." The clip was something like 25 seconds long. And yet the copyright owner threatened to sue You Tube if they didn't take the clip down.

It was Prince...he has a long and "wonderful" history of being an asshat when it comes to "copyright infringement". I'm just hoping this ruling makes the lawyers think a little before issuing a DMCA takedown notice, not holding my breath though. It might give people in that situation a bit more firepower on their side though.

[WalkinTarget]

Raspberry beret, indeed !!!

[mapes]

The problem is not the lawyers. they're following the law. The problem is the DMCA is F'd up. Yep bad law....bad