What the fuck did you just postOriginally Posted by psuexv
What the fuck did you just post
The dude abides.
What in the wide, wide world of fuck was that?
My guess it's from Eric's workout playlist.
The dude abides.
What the fox did you just postFixed it for you
And JB don't act like it's the first time you've ever heard it
http://www.thegamingtailgate.com/for...l=1#post219461
Yeah, not doctored at allAnd JB don't act like it's the first time you've ever heard it
http://www.thegamingtailgate.com/for...l=1#post219461
The dude abides.
Twitter just filed to become an IPO.
The dude abides.
I'm not gonna lie, I kinda like it...
And thus, we see the last good days of Twitter. Guaranteed, it's gonna start sucking after this now that it will have shareholders.
Things that make you go hmmmm.....
Yeah I am sure Putin would be pissng in his camo pants at the thought of Mitt Romney's backbone.
Alright, resident law people/CLW, I have a law question regarding online videos and published books being read during them.
Say, for instance, a person decided to read an entire book through the course of several videos, would that be considered copyright infringement by the publisher/writer of said book being read? I'm curious because it seems like books are becoming the 3rd wheel of copyright infringement issues (what with music, movies, and video games being the big three) and I was curious if there were any legal precedents based on written publications and online video of those publications or if it would fall under the same light as someone doing a reading of a book in a bookstore infront of a crowd and therefore be fair game for public showing (kinda like how it's fair game for people to watch videos of people playing video games).
That is a tough one, if they are playing the publisher's copy of the book on audio on the video then they have a problem. If it is just them reading aloud the book and they are not charging you to watch/listen to the video I don't see a problem. Mom's have been reading to groups of children for a long timedisclaimer: I am not a licensed attorney, nor should this post in any way be taken as legal advice.
A helpful site.....for insomniacs
...his sweet talk is also savory and creamy ....
The dude abides.
It's borderline honestly. Can you be sued for it? Sure you can be sued for just about anything in this country given the litigious nature our society has gotten itself into.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/200...14293724.shtml
There is the concept of "Fair Use"
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C.§ 106 and 17 U.S.C.§ 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:
- the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
- the nature of the copyrighted work;
- the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
- the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors
It is NOT my area of expertise and this area of law is RAPIDLY changing every day with technology advancing and law always trying to catch up with the technology. My advice if you do it, do NOT monetize it b/c you will be a target. If you do monetize it, you better pause take breaks and comment on your thoughts/opinions are so you have a "fair use" defense.
In 1985, the US Supreme Court held that a news article's quotation of approximately 300 words from former President Gerald Ford's 200,000 word memoir was sufficient to constitute an infringement of the exclusive publication right in the work. While copying an entire work may make it harder to justify the amount and substantiality test, it does not make it impossible that a use is fair use. For instance, in the Betamax case, it was ruled that copying a complete television show for time-shifting purposes is fair use.
Basically, I just wouldn't do it b/c your essentially asking to get sued.
Last edited by CLW; 09-16-2013 at 05:32 PM.
Thanks CLW. Definitely interesting.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks