Ask MetaFilter posts tagged with fairuse

Copyright law for online images

leibniz — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 12:09:44 -0800

What are my legal rights, and what compensation can I get from a UK television channel who used a photograph I had taken without my permission, but which I had uploaded onto facebook?? Channel 4 news in the UK recently used a photograph I had taken of a friend of mine in one of its items (it's on screen for well over a minute). This was used without permission or credit. I had uploaded the image to a public group on facebook, but as I see it, I had uploaded it for use within the group and not for commercial purposes. It is certainly not legally public domain just because it is on a social website.

The news item can be found here.
The photo can be found here (requires facebook login).

So what I would like to know is firstly what my legal rights are here, and secondly who I can complain to (in UK remember) in order to get compensation? I hope I can get some money to donate to his legal fund.

(You may have seen the mefi FPP I wrote about the case here btw.)

Fair Use or Not?

fvox13 — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 07:13:57 -0800

YANAL filter: Quick question about United States trademark law and fair use of logos on a website. I am creating a website for our (United States, New York) college's Foreign Language Computer Lab. One of the pages contains a listing of the software packages available for use in the lab, and a brief description of each. Next to the description is a (small, low-resolution) copy of the logo for the given software package. Is this legal, or does it violate trademark/copyright law?

I think it's fair use, but the director of the Lab is concerned that we would be opening ourselves up to a possible lawsuit, since we don't have formal written permission from all of the companies. What does the hive mind think, or do you have any similar experience?

Legally adding video clips to a review site?

Foci for Analysis — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:30:11 -0800

I'm working on a site (it's a personal project) where I basically review movies that I like. Lately, I've been thinking about adding video clips from the movies/series to give visitors a better understanding of what the movies/series are about. How do I do this legally? My idea is to take a couple of minutes from each movie, do some minor editing and upload it to YouTube or a similar site.

However, this seems pretty difficult from a legal perspective. It seems like I have to get permission for each and every clip, which would take too much time (we're talking 40+ movies/series). To make matters worse, I'm not sure which country's laws to follow: I live in Sweden, the web site is hosted in the US and I'm not sure about the video hosting provider.

ID this UI & Video Fair Use

MaxVonCretin — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:25:02 -0800

Two Totally Unrelated Questions About THIS VIDEO. Not the content of the video, but the usage. 1) What flash player/UI is that? Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I feel like I've been seeing it not just on Gawker sites, but on many others. Is that a standard player UI that is built into Flash for output to .flv files? 2) Obviously this is totally unauthorized usage. Would this be considered "fair use"? Can anyone recommend any articles on the current state of fair use and online video? Are companies like Gawker and Huffington Post (example) on firm legal ground with this kind of excerpting, which they then host in their own systems/servers, or are they just gambling that the web is so anarchic, that Mr. Big Media Company won't come a suin'?

Is it fair use to use original clips from Deal or No Deal in a parody?

tweebiscuit — Sun, 08 Jul 2007 16:16:50 -0800

I'm producing a parody of Deal or No Deal. Since assembling an audience of sufficient size is beyond my means, I am planning to occasionally show audience shots from an original episode of Deal or No Deal. Does this qualify as fair use? Here are the conditions under which the footage will be used:

1) The use is commercial. (It will also be internet-only, not that that makes a big difference.)
2) The piece is a parody of the show that we're taking source footage from, and there's a longstanding precedent for parody qualifying as criticism.
3) The usage is extremely limited (a few two-to-five second clips) and transformative (in most cases we'll be matting out everything but the audience and compositing the shot behind our own actors -- that is, we'll be creating a collage of our footage and footage from the original show.)

I obviously don't expect definitive legal advice, and am well aware that fair use is notoriously hard to define until after-the-fact -- and in the long run, the decision will largely be based on what our publisher finds acceptable. Still, trying the question on you guys will help me get a feel for whether or not we're overstepping our limits here. Thanks!

Public Domain?

davidinmanhattan — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 21:40:49 -0800

Does the public library have the right to charge a "licensing fee" or "usage fee" for images, photos, drawings, etc., that they have placed online, but that were created before January 1, 1923? Isn't this work in the public domain, and therefore, free of charge? I have tried to do as much research as I can, but I am still confused.
Here are some of the ask mefi posts I have read:
Are these people crazy? A copyright law question.
Can I "borrow" a copyrighted thing?
I have a question regarding copyright, public domain, and the digital domain. It's kind of a "fight the power" thing.

I want to grab images from the New York Public Library's Digital Collection. I do not want to buy prints, I am not looking for high resolution files, nor would I resell these works. I do not think I am obligated to "license" these images. The use is for a semi-commercial blog, that I hope one day might be commercial.

The NYPL states that "Commercial use is any use that brings value to the person or organization displaying the photograph to the public." The library also claims: "As the physical rights holder of this material, most of which is in the public domain for copyright purposes, the Library charges a usage fee to license an image for commercial use (defined above). The usage fee is not a copyright fee. You are free to obtain a copy of these images from a source other than NYPL. Usage fees help ensure that the Library is able to continue to acquire, preserve and provide access to its collections."

It's not that I'm cheap, it's just that I am under the impression that "we" all "own" these works, especially since some of them were created in the 1800s. And the fees the NYPL proposes are $55 to $85, which would become rather expensive for more than a few.

Many thanks for your help!

What is a way to copy blog content to allow for comments?

davidstandaford — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 11:13:38 -0800

Would it be possible to set up an automated way to mirror portions of posts from a popular weblog to allow people to comment on posts if the original writer does not have comments on his blog? Would this be illegal? I read a couple of popular blogs that do not allow comments. I understand the personal reasons why the blogger might not allow them, but I think the world would be a better place if people could comment on and discuss these blog posts. I would like to run a a parallel blog which includes one post for each post they write that would only contain the first 4 or 5 words of their original post (so it could be identified by someone coming from their blog), a link to the original post, and a place to comment. I would like to do this with someone like Instapundit or Andrew Sullivan and would likely do it with blogspot or wordpress.com.

1) Would it be easy to set something up with RSS or Yahoo Pipes to take a post and republish it on my blog in the form of:

Post Found Here "First Four Post Words" [Place for Comments]

2) I realize you are not my lawyer, but does anyone have a sense if this would be covered under fair use or some other legal principle? It would be impossible for someone to get by only ready my blog, they would have to have visited the real blog first in order to understand the post, my blog would only be a place to comment on the substance of the original post. I wouldn't have any ads on the blog.

3) Does anything like this exist for any blogs, or has it been tried before, to anyone's knowledge?

Copyright issue | 1975 | Fair use | Japan or US?

gomichild — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 09:52:07 -0800

CopyrightFilter: Would it be naughty of me to scan some images from Japanese Time Life books from 1975 and post them on my little blog? I was given a stack of Japanese Time Life Books from 1975 which cover different regions of the world. Some of the images are fascinating and I would like to scan and post them. However 1975 is not all that long ago...

The books are Japanese - but there is no Time-Life Japanese division. I think a lot of the material is derived from the US Edition. So the copyright states that I need to seek permission to reproduce material - but from who?

Then to consider Fair Use laws. I will probably only be scanning a few images to use for comparison. The books are Japanese, I am based in Japan - but my blog is about to be hosted on a server in the US. Whose Fair Use laws should I be paying attention to?

Posting television transcripts on the web?

crickets — Wed, 09 May 2007 13:40:06 -0800

Is it permissible to transcribe TV shows and post said transcripts on the web? The copyrights to the TV shows in question do not belong to me. Does this fall under fair use?

Copyrights on a deleted blog post

pineapple — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 11:48:04 -0800

What's the copyright and reprint status of the original content of a blog post that has since been deleted? I'm considering both the legal implications and the ethical concerns, plus don't know how much "fair use" applies in a commercial case. Bob Q. Techauthority updates a weekly blog for an American tech publication. He specializes in writing about widgets and various widget producers.

Last week he posts about ModeratelyBigPlayerCompany's exploration of a new execution of widget, and whether it will ever take off in a very monopolized widget market.

In the post, there are a few paragraphs of generic industry commentary, in the vein of "open markets are good," and then some specific content regarding MBPC's new product strategies.

My company is an affiliate of the widget industry; the more open the market, the better for us. Bob's anti-monopoly statements are positive for us, and I'd like to quote a couple of them for commercial use in some marketing material.

(By "a couple of comments," I mean just one or two sentences, not the whole post. By "marketing material" I mean, possibly on a website or white paper to help support a sales point, but definitely not printed on or in anything that would ultimately be a product for sale -- just your average ~~snake oil~~ ~~shill~~ collateral.)

Fast forward to today... when the post is gone. Bob reports on his blog that ModeratelyBigPlayerCompany contacted him, and said that the bits about their corporate strategies were proprietary and confidential, so he willingly removed them.

Bob did not say anything today wrt deleting the generic industry comments -- but they were merely part of the bigger story and would have been apropos of nothing without the context of MBPC's product.

Here are my specific questions:

1. If Bob had not removed the post, and all other things being equal, would I have been clear to use the two sentences without asking for reprint permission, under "fair use doctrine"? Public criticism on a general industry topic seems to make the answer a "yes" but I acknowledge that I might not understand fair use fully, especially vis-a-vis the "commercial" part.

2. Now that Bob has removed the post, am I ethically bound to not quote any of the material? I don't want to get anywhere near the bits about MBPC; I just want the "monopolies are bad, mmkay?" stuff.

Thanks in advance, and yes, I'll assume that YANAL. I just want to know what reasonable people think would be the Right Thing to Do, or if anyone has similar experience.

How far does fair use extend?

afx237vi — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 16:26:23 -0800

Copyright question about using sports photos in a blog... I have a small sports related blog in which I write about current sporting events. I would like to use up-to-date photos to illustrate my posts, but was wondering about the copyright implication of using photos from places like AFP or Reuters.

If I resize the photos to, say, 150 px, give the photo a © caption and use them for illustrative purposes, am I covered by fair use?

What about those headshots that are released for publicity and put on team websites? Can I use them?

What about logos of teams and sporting events?

Most of the blogs I read are crammed full of photos and I often wonder about whether they've a) paid a royalty, b) received permission, or c) just used them and hoped they don't get sued.

Up until now, I've always shied away from using images in my blog, just because I don't own any of the rights. For what it's worth, my blog is hosted in the UK and most of the sport I write about takes place in Europe.

Need free war on terror footage for documentary.

kookoobirdz — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 06:59:18 -0800

Where can I find good quality free video footage of the "war on terror" for use as b-roll in a documentary? In short, I need royalty-free and cost-free footage of "the war on terror" at a size/framerate suitable for inclusion in a documentary. Where is it and how do I get it free?

Detail:
I'm assisting a documentary filmmaker space out a documentary by finding footage clips to use as b-roll to break up all the talking heads. We're looking for video on a number of themes, but the primary one I'm after right now is generic "war on terror" stuff, such as Afghanistan/Iraq war footage, 9/11, other terrorist incidents and aftermath, speeches, coverage of notable domestic policy changes, lifestyle changes, and anything else that conveys the sort of atmosphere we find ourselves living in since 9/11.

It's the usual shoestring budget scenario, so we're looking to get free footage whenever possible, and to use it via the Fair Use doctrine (I know that's a can of worms, but I'm just looking for sources at this point). I've never done this before and am trying to identify places to get this sort of footage. Google shows me plenty of stock footage houses which offer high quality, royalty-free clips, but they aren't cost-free. And I can find plenty of free stuff out on the internet but it's poor quality. Only archive.org (as previous AskMe threads suggested) has so far offered free stuff in higher quality, though it's kind of a mongrel bag of stuff and not usually the raw footage but somebody else's montage and commentary.

In cases where we could legitimately reproduce footage under Fair Use, how do I actually get my hands on the high quality footage for free to start with? For example C-SPAN offers loads of archives of usable stuff, but you still have to buy it to actually get it in your hands in order to excerpt clips from it.

Is there a way to get this kind of thing free?

The ethics of CCL and Flickr

FunkyHelix — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 15:29:21 -0800

I need to know if I'm doing something wrong by displaying a derivative digital art piece. Someone thumbnailed a photo from flickr, and it immediately inspired an art idea. So I tracked down the photographer at their filckr account and check the license on the photo. It was listed as Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0, meaning I could use it for derivative works, as long as I gave attribution and the resulting piece was kept noncommercial.

I really should have just used the photo, linked back to the original and be done with it. But I know sometimes people license their photos not really believing anyone will actually use them. So I e-mailed the photographer to make sure I had permission. Meanwhile, I created my own digital art work using the photo and finished it.

The photographer wrote back that they would love if I used the photo. However, they had just entered it into a contest with a rule that the photo couldn't be unpublished, and they were concerned by my taking and then displaying work using this photo, that they would be disqualified - would I be willing to wait until the contest end. I agreed and even sent them a copy of the finished piece, which we e-mailed back and forth about for a day or two.

Fast forward a month and I haven't heard anything back from the photographer. I send a polite e-mail explaining who I was again and that after a month I wanted to check in on how the contest was coming. I hear nothing back. I contact them again, this time through the Flickr messaging. Still no word, though the photographer has uploaded two batches of photos since I sent it, meaning their account is still active.

I double checked and the photo in question is still up and still listed under the exact same Creative Commons License.

Would it be illegal for me to go ahead and display my derivative digital art, even if I followed the license it is being publicly displayed under on Flickr currently?

TrademarkFilter: Fair use of an old logo?

maniactown — Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:06:21 -0800

I'm wondering about the way that trademarks can be enforced in a very specific instance. I'd like get some (useful household) items made that feature a trademarked line drawing. This image, which could generically be considered a logotype, has been trademarked since the early 60s. It appears to have recently been registered with USPTO for a bunch of generic Goods & Services categories that don't have anything to do with the original product at all:

IC 025. US 022 039. G & S: CLOTHING AND HEADGEAR,
IC 014. US 002 027 028 050. G & S: CLOCKS, MATCHES, COSTUME JEWELRY, ASHTRAYS, COLLECTIBLE PROMOTIONAL ITEMS,
IC 006. US 002 012 013 014 023 025 050. G & S: METAL RINGS AND CHAINS FOR KEYS,
IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: BACKLIT SIGNS, ELECTRIC SIGNS, NEON SIGNS

(I'm ommitting a bunch of others).

It is my understanding that trademarks don't expire as long as the holder is actively defending the mark for its registered uses.

So, can I legally make some items that don't expressly fall into one of these categories but use this trademarked image? I'm mostly looking to use this image for personal purposes and without monetary gain. However, if the items turn out nicely, I'd consider selling them on a small scale if it was legitimate to do so within the scope of copyright and trademark law.

I'm being intentionally vague about my intentions and the trademark in question as I don't want to open myself up to a C&D before I even get started. I know that I should consult a qualified lawyer and hereby release you from the advice you are about to provide.

Okay to use non-musical samples in music?

Durhey — Fri, 21 Apr 2006 15:04:01 -0800

Is it okay, legally speaking, to use non-musical audio samples in a musical recording? I know you're probably not a lawyer, but a general idea would be good to have. For instance, if phrases of speech were recorded from the television, radio, or a movie and used in a song, is that actionable?

Such use of samples is widespread, but is it because there's no legal ground for complaint of such use, or because most of the samplees don't know or care about the samples?

My band's "thing" is making very liberal use of such material. We've always distributed our music for free, but we're submitting to the MeFi compilation album, and it would be good to know that there would be no issues arising because of this.

Specifically, I wish to know if the audio in the KFC radio commercial outtakes available here could be sampled for a music piece without worrying about Colonel Sanders' crack team of lawyers frying our figurative chicken.

Nibb High Football Rules.

AgentRocket — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 08:09:50 -0800

Help me impress my boss: where can I find video of the Billy Madison "Industrial Revolution" speech online? Inspired by this court order, I have been tasked with finding a clip from Billy Madison to show at my law firm's section meeting. My boss thinks I am a whiz at finding things online, and I want to maintain the illusion of my expertise.

The clip is where Billy answers a question about the industrial revolution by comparing it to the book The Loneliest Puppy. The judge mocks him and says something about how it is the stupidest thing he has ever heard and he awards no points. I am looking for a clip that contains the whole question, answer, and judge's speech. YouTube and Google Video offer no help.

If I could come up with this by noon (that's less than two hours) I would be a hero. I petition the powerful AskMe for assistance.

Matrimonyugh

arcticwoman — Thu, 26 Jan 2006 09:04:47 -0800

I have a fun idea for a snarky blog, but I have one legality question and one name question. I was looking through a bridal magazine yesterday with my partner and our combined commentary on the stupid rings, ridiculous dresses, strange poses, and so on, had me laughing so hard I was crying. I would like to make a blog - sort of like Go Fug Yourself - but instead of trashing celebrities we will make fun of stuff we find in wedding magazines.

Obviously, this would require scanning photos from said magazines and commenting on them... is this legal? I am in Canada, and I have some inkling that it would fall under "fair use" laws, but I want to be sure.

If it is legal, what are some witty or punny name suggestions?

Question number 15045

armando — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 17:02:55 -0800

There's a guy out there on the web that has chosen to name his blog after me, Armando Bellmas. Instead of feeling flattered, I feel used. As a photographer my name is my business name, too, and I can't have this guy moving in on my turf. I don't know him nor have I given him permission to use my name. Plus, his blog is coming up in the top ten search results for my name at Google. He has not replied to any of my email inquiries and, short of calling an attorney for advice, I'm turning to you guys and the web for help. Thanks in advance.

Question number 14786

McGuillicuddy — Fri, 04 Feb 2005 20:02:48 -0800

Copyright law: Can I reproduce a table or a series of tables or diagrams from professional journals as part of a larger educational critical analysis and distribute my new work under a Creative Commons or GPL type license? I think that as long as my use is allowed under fair use doctrine, I can release my creation under my own terms. Correct? Or are data tables and modelling diagrams beyond fair use? Does the fact that it is educational and non-profit matter?

Question number 14147

cedar — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:34:58 -0800

Newspaper fair use. My children, in a story about their school, were recently featured (extensive quotes, several photos) on the front page of a large newspaper. To preserve this and prevent it from vanishing into the depths of their pay only archives I have mirrored the relevant page. I expect that this isn't entirely legal and was wondering how much of the article (if any) I can make available and stay within the 'fair use' guidelines?

Question number 11615

BrodieShadeTree — Tue, 09 Nov 2004 11:38:51 -0800

Copyright vs. Satire: How far can one extend the 'fair use' or satire legalities when it comes to using similar imagery in advertisement? (more inside)

Question number 5555

Shane — Mon, 01 Mar 2004 08:53:23 -0800

I might want to post a picture of W Bush with a potentially inflammatory caption on my blog. Probably NOT a good idea for me to just grab an AP photo..? (Inside, dere is more.)

Question number 4896

vacapinta — Sun, 25 Jan 2004 20:22:45 -0800

I like to read several academic journals online. Some, however, only have article titles along with a "only available in print edition." However, quick googling for the author of each article often leads me to a copy of said article on the author's website . Without too much more effort, I soon have 90% of the journal contents, scattered across author websites. Whats going on here? Who is being fooled? If i built a web page with links to all these articles would i be in copyright violation?