Thank you, Gary! I think your example of Avatar is very interesting. If I
were the librarian, I would ask the professor to explain why the prof needs
the entire film, and how the students will interact with the entire film to
demonstrate the point. There are, for instance, hilarious mashups of
Thank you for noticing that fair use does not threaten content owners.
Indeed, most of us are content owners, after all. One of the benefits of
having clear understandings at the level of professional practice about
fair use is that it reduces marketplace friction, and makes it easier for
content
As you said - you are not a lawyer.
JM
From: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu
[mailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Patricia
Aufderheide
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2012 9:36 AM
To: ghand...@library.berkeley.edu
Cc: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re:
Nor does this contribute to clear understanding in any way.
And asserting that this something (ill-defined and subject of much debate -
i.e. a moving target) does not threaten content owners does not make it
so. Content owners are a diverse lot, as are their rights and interests.
I can
You seem to be putting words in my mouth if the below reply is directed to my
comment. I do agree that the world would be a better place if everyone had a
clear understanding of all copyright law. I applaud ACRL taking a step in that
direction. My concern is an overly aggressive interpretation
Pat,
If you and the people who developed these best practices guidelines
are sincere that you are not the enemy of content owners, how bout a
simple and CLEAR statement that fair use' does NOT cover the use of
feature material being assigned to classes. I mean it is cute to come
up with a
Whether streaming an entire film for a class for the same purposes (and amount)
as 110 is legally fair or not, I don't see how the effect on the copyright
holder would be any different than if the title were used under 110, especially
if the limitations put forward by these best practices are
Michael,
The first obvious answer is the need for only one DVD instead of multiple
copies at the library on hold for students. And of course, a streamed
version can be used for multiple campuses or for distance learning use
where more copies would have been needed. And there's always the fact
First of all 110 is blessedly specific and requires that the showing
be in a CLASSROOM or similar place of instruction and that the
instructor be PRESENT and I assure legally this is not even a close
call and I don't even get the impression that the
best practices tried for that one. Under no
Hello everyone,
Jessica Rosner asks If you ... are sincere that you are not the enemy of
content owners, how bout a simple and CLEAR statement that fair use' does NOT
cover the use of feature material being assigned to classes.
I am not one of the authors of the guidelines, but I can imagine
Representative from CSM and ALA have often stressed that the use of items in
instruction is not always Fair Use or 110, but could be both. I was hoping this
code would provide more guidance in defining when Fair Use is in play in
pedagogy.
I feel that the Fair Use of feature films in
Would a proposal for a program on the new code of best practices be welcome at
National Media Market, or would such a session it just turn into a rant
session? I'm thinking of a general discussion then breakout into smaller
groups with real life examples to discuss, is a particular use covered
Hello,
I have been looking for a copy of the 1918 movie, Tih Minh. I found a copy on
this site: http://shop.vendio.com/HARDTOFINDFILMS/item/2082497227/index.html
Does anyone have experience with this site? Are the copies legitimate to add
to our collection?
Thanks in advance,
Bethany
The discussion on this issue has been very interesting and thought provoking
and I appreciate all the well thought out contributions.
Perhaps we need to think about another way to go about providing film resources
for classes. Think outside the box, especially for feature films. That's a
This may seem like a naive question, but is all the focus on theatrical because
it is assumed that a program from an educational distributor would not qualify
under fair use because of the adverse affect upon the potential market for or
value of the copyrighted work? And if this is true, would
I am afraid the focus on feature films is my fault Bob. I will be
honest, I focus on features because to me it makes it even clearer
that the people pushing the best practices and other similar views
on fair use (and that there is no limit to amount you can use) often
want to justify streaming of
The ARL Code of Best Practices specifically addresses this very point.
Page 8
When a use merely supplants a copyright owner¹s core market rather than
having a transformative purpose, it is unlikely to be fair. Thus, for
example, a library clearly cannot acquire current books for its collection
I appreciate this Deg but it really does not clarify the core issue of
schools claiming the right to stream entire works which again we all
know many are. Perhaps the library does not acquire the book current
books by copying them, it is vague as to if they could copy and
circulate additional
Michael,
I have no problem and never did with reasonable and limited
portions, but let's not pretend that is what we are arguing over.
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Brewer, Michael
brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote:
Just some clarification. TEACH exempts films produced specifically for use
Feature films seem to be a particularly controversial area, because if I
understood Peter Jaszi correctly when he responded to questions about the Best
Practices today: to use a film that was originally marketed for entertaininment
purposes for educational purposes would be a transformative
i believe i own the film i'm working on right now, the work, a
documentary about emerging a/v culture in cuba, but whether i like it
or not, i only own the rights to it, for a limited time. and others
can use it, tweak it, parody it, stream it, if they decide it is for
the public good (not the
You had me up until the part about streaming it for the public good.
The Constitution does not intervene in the slightest. There is nothing
in the Constitution that says someone can stream ( or copy) your film
for the public good, nothing even close in copyright law. If you
believe this I hope you
the constitution suggests we must be flexible in protecting the public
good. it doesn't say someone can go gangster and pirate my film. that
might happen. ok. the constitutional premise opens up ethical and
moral opportunities where someone might have to stream or copy my film
for the public good.
The Constitution has a broad concept of copyright law but there have
been over 200 years of changes and case law that has developed. Pretty
much any filmmaker I know thinks of themselves as the owner of a film
and since I can't imagine any of them living 95 years past their
creations as a
24 matches
Mail list logo
