Timeline for Fair Use and DMCA
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 30, 2021 at 6:46 | comment | added | Kevin | @pigeonburger: Do you specifically know that they asked Twitter to take your account down, or are you speculating? Pursuant to 17 USC 512(i)(1)(A), Twitter must terminate the accounts of "repeat infringers" whether the rightsholders ask them to or not. | |
| Mar 29, 2021 at 22:19 | comment | added | pigeonburger | @Sneftel As far as I know, the youtube-dl case isn't even going to court, they took no further action after the software was reinstated. I wonder why..? | |
| Mar 29, 2021 at 22:18 | comment | added | slebetman | @Dale M - I think you should also address the misconception that fair use isn't a law in the OP's question above. Fair use is part of the law, specifically it is the name given to the part of the law that is covered in section 107 of the US Copyright Act (not just DMCA but the main copyright act). Other countries may or may not have fair use in their copyright law but that doesn't matter when content makers can sue you or Twitter in a US court | |
| Mar 29, 2021 at 22:17 | comment | added | pigeonburger | @slebetman They begun with taking down a few videos, and then pushed to have the account fully removed from Twitter. | |
| Mar 29, 2021 at 22:13 | comment | added | slebetman | @josh3736 My understanding is that the record companies so far isn't taking down EditVideoBot itself but videos generated by EditVideoBot which do violate copyright. Users of course can use the program to generate fair use content such as commenting on the style of music in the video, teaching about music in the video etc. I presume so far most of the content taken down are clearly not fair use. It does not matter if you make money from posting the videos it just matter that you don't have permission to use the music. | |
| Mar 29, 2021 at 22:12 | comment | added | Sneftel | @pigeonburger Whether YouTube-dl infringes copyright hasn’t been addressed by a court. GitHub, as a publisher, unilaterally chose not to enforce the takedown. | |
| Mar 29, 2021 at 21:58 | comment | added | pigeonburger |
@josh3736 I agree. In an edit to my question, I provided the example of youtube-dl, which technically faciliates the downloading of copyrighted music, does it not? Yet they were able to reverse the DMCA complaint, because just because it "can be used" to infringe, shouldn't be grounds for disabling access to the software. I think it's the same in my case.
|
|
| Mar 29, 2021 at 21:31 | comment | added | josh3736 | It's rather harsh to say this "looks exactly like a piracy tool". It's not, no more than Premiere or Final Cut are piracy tools. I'd argue the tool has compelling non-infringing uses. cf Betamax "the business of supplying the equipment that makes such copying feasible should not be stifled simply because the equipment is used by some individuals to make unauthorized reproductions of [copyrighted] works" | |
| Mar 29, 2021 at 10:48 | history | answered | Dale M♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |