Badmovies.org Forum

Actually it's a group they belong to called the Computer & Communications Industry Association.  They've filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission that  the copyright notices that the RIAA, MPAA, and major league sports use are misleading.  I never knew that you had to get the commissioner of baseball's permission to discuss a game with someone.

Here's the article (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070828-google-microsoft-backed-group-ready-to-defend-fair-use.html).

And the Copyright Alliance does not like that idea:

http://news.com.com/Fair+use+is+not+a+consumer+right/2010-1030_3-6205977.html
(Editorial by Copyright Alliance executive director.)

I like how he tries to spin the change in a poor light, as being something unneeded.  However, if you read some more, I'd say that he does not like the idea of Fair Use at all.  He seems to forget that copyright is a carrot offered by society to help promote the creation of new works.  When you get down to it, society is saying, "We understand that there must be some reason for you to create something.  If you create a work, then cannot benefit from it, you will not have a reason to create more works.  SO, to encourage you, here is a limited period of protection so that you might benefit."

More and more, I see that idea, which I firmly believe is the intent of copyright, being twisted.

Fair Use is provided to further serve the interests of society.  "Yes, this person's work is protected.  However, if you use pieces of it for review, criticism, or educational purposes, that is in the best interest of society.  This trumps the creator's copyright protection."

I have changed the site's Fair Use page, because I think the point brought up is a good one.

From paragraph 5 of the article Andrew posted:

"But let's look beyond the hyperbole. . ."

Now, from paragraph 10 of the same article. . .

"So, how exactly would the FTC rewrite these copyright notices to reflect a consumer's ability to attempt a fair use defense? Should they paste in all of the above language? - - - We could have an IP lawyer fold in a treatise on fair use, and baseball announcers could start reading it at the seventh-inning stretch to make sure they finish it before the end of the game."

So much for looking beyond hyperbole, eh?

I agree with you, Andrew, on this one - that copyright law is being twisted, in many circles, so that it does less to protect the artist or their work and more to protect the paycheck of various corporate heads.  There seems to be a lot of talk about copyright and fair use going on at the moment and it'll be interesting to see where it all goes. . .

Kindest regards,

Kevin P.
http://www.wtf-film.com

Copyright is hopelessly skewed in one direction (towards the corporates, via easily purchased senators and other law makers) it has knotted itself multiple times.  I don't think it will ever come undone. 

What's the standard copyright now for corporate creations?  75 years?  It's ridiculous.