Posts Tagged ‘copyright & intellectual property’

Ask an expert about Fair Use

April 20, 2011

YouTube and the Center for Internet and Society are hosting a Fair Use question and answer session. From YouTube Blog: “Fair use is a legal term that grants creators an exception to the strict copyright that the original content owner controls — in layman’s terms, it’s the idea that as long as the use is “fair,” someone can reference part of someone else’s work for parody, scholarly reasons, or more.

What constitutes “fair use” is a complicated issue and one that we get asked about quite often. So we’ve asked two leading experts from the Stanford Center for Internet and Society (CIS), Anthony Falzone and Julie Ahrens, to help answer your questions.”

Anthony Falzone and Julie Ahrens, Executive Directors of the Fair Use Project, will be accepting questions until April 21 through Google Moderator. On May 2 they will answer questions on video and re-post the questions/answers on their CIS blog. Google Moderator will also allow you to vote on other questions you hope to have answered by Falzone and Ahrens.

Court rules Richard Prince liable for Infringement

March 22, 2011

According to a federal court judge in New York, artist Richard Prince and the Gagosian Gallery infringed on photographer Patrick Cariou’s copyrights when Prince produced “Canal Zone,” a series of 29 paintings taken from Cariou’s book titled Yes, Rasta. Prince created collages and paintings from photographs — details but also some “used in their entirety or nearly so” — torn from Cariou’s book.  Prince’s maintained that Cariou’s photographs were “‘mere compilations of facts…arranged with minimum creativity…[and] are therefore not protectable’ by copyright law,” and that his transformation of Cariou photographs through his appropriation is protected under the doctrine of “fair-use.” The judge rejected Prince’s defense, refering to the Rogers v. Koons case: “If an infringement of copyrightable expression could be justified as fair use solely on the basis of the infringer’s claim to a higher or different artistic use . . . there would be no practicable boundary to the fair use defense.” Fair Use permits copyrighted works to be used without permission under certain provisions, in particular criticism, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research.  Prince has been ordered by the court to destroy all the infringing works. To read more, go to the complete March 21 pdn article.

Fair Use primer

November 18, 2010

Can’t grasp tFair(y) Use Talehe concepts of Fair Use or the Public Domain? You are not alone.  Every year, more and more students are creating multimedia projects for class assignments, and frequently using copyrighted materials without any awareness of possible consequences. According to Patrick J. McGrail, assistant professor of communication at Jackson State University, we are in a “low-level crisis in copyright education now” (source: “Professors Publish Guide to Copyright Issues of Multimedia Projects”, Chronicle of Higher Education). Fortunately Eric Faden, a professor at Bucknell University, has created a video —  A Fair(y) Use Tale — to help clarify these confusing copyright principles.

Ansel Adams meets the Antiques Roadshow

November 10, 2010

It all began ten years ago when Rick Norsigian bought 2 boxes of negatives at a Fresno garage sale for $45. Art, handwriting and weather experts concluded that within these boxes of negatives were 65 plates produced by Ansel Adams; in July, an art dealer valued the negatives at $200 million. A short while later, a relative of Earl Brooks — a contemporary of Ansel Adams — claimed that the images were taken by Brooks, not Adams. Add now we can add Arthur C. Pillsbury to the list of possible creators of the Norsigian negatives.  According to the New York Times, because Yosemite was such a popular spot for photographers at this time (80 years ago), this may not be the last of the plot twists. The Ansel Adams Publishing Rights Trust, the Center for Creative Photography and the University of Arizona archive, along with a number of art and forensic experts, dispute Norsigian’s claim to own authentic Adam’s negatives. The Adams trust and Norsigian meet in federal court this week over an alleged trademark violation resulting from Norsigian’s sale of prints of the negatives.