Andy,
I agree the location does not matter. It could be in a classroom, office or a
box with green eggs and ham. To me the issue is personal vs. public. Giving my
age away, way back when it was simple. The personal or consumer home video
license was for viewing in your dwelling by yourself and
I think it's relevant that the license states that it's okay to screen the
film in a location such as a "hotel room, dorm room, office, or airport
waiting lounge" provided that the screening "is limited to a private
viewing for you and your invitees" (note that the license says "invitees,"
not
Well, using the I'm not a lawyer just thinking logically approach, a professor
and the students seems more similar to a public performance than a private
viewing. Profs may have an affinity for their students but the students are not
the prof's friends. It is rare that a prof would invite
Hi Bob and all,
Yes, exactly: the classroom is a public space, i.e, playing a film there would
be considered a public performance.
Sec. 110(1) is the "but." If all of the factors in Sec. 110(1) apply to the
public performance, you can exercise the exemption it allows.
Relatedly, even when
Except as Dennis pointed out a contract trumps or supersedes 110 which is
why you can't use Netflx etc in a classroom.
I have mixed feelings, as someone who has worked with both librarians and
filmmakers for decades as well as total film geek it is deeply troubling
that there are increasing
Again I think it is more than a stretch to claim showing a film/program to
what can be a large number of people is "personal" use or that students are
"invitees" but like I said someone might bring this up to the speakers at
NMM
Jessica
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Andrew Horbal
Thanks, CW, for your input on this issue. As Kevin Smith noted, when writing
about the unfortunate AIME v UCLA case...
"We routinely assume that “contracts trump copyright;” libraries are told that
all the time regarding the databases they license, and they often pass the
message on to users.
