> so fair use = part or all of a work for the purposes of: criticism, > comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship or research. > with words on the internet, it's fairly cut and dry. > bloggers are usually criticising, commenting, reporting, teaching or > reserching. it's easy :-) > with something like a remix song, it's less clear perhaps. Does the song > provide a critical commentary on a subject in a way that requires a sample > of the subject in order to make the commentary? etc...
so im making a video about the tech scene in San Francisco. Can I use snippets of people's videos from tech parties in my commentary on the SF scene? this would be like me grabbing text snippets from people's blogs to show the ideas in the community. attribution is of course given as it would be in a text blog. My point is that there seems to be an idea that online videos are like individually wrapped movies not to be touched, instead of pieces of a large conversation we can all use to talk to each other. This "watch but dont touch" mentality is being firmly entrenched in our minds with Youtube leading the way since there is no easy way to grab a Youtube video from the site. Youtube being the largest video site has the greatest impact on how we understand correct interaction. So as creators, our relationship is this: you make a video. I watch. I make a video for you to watch. We do not use each others videos. if you replaced "text" where I said "video", you would not have blogging as we know it today. Jay -- http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790 Professional: http://ryanishungry.com Personal: http://momentshowing.net Photos: http://flickr.com/photos/jaydedman/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/jaydedman RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9
