May 23, 2004

• TOPIC: COPYRIGHT LAW

  
  

  So, I did a little homework about copyright law.  Turns out, there are certain “fair use” exceptions where you can use copyright law.  Although the law has gray areas, based on the 4 criteria, I should have no problem quoting from such books as Dude, Where’s My Country, Stupid White Men, Tuesday’s With Morrie, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintanance, and the New York Times.

  
  

  The issues are:

  
  

  1) purpose of use – if you’re using something for education or the general benefit of others, versus trying to get rich off of someone elses copyrighted work, then you should be ok

  
  

  2) nature of the work used – if the work is intended to spark conversation, versus a piece of creative writing, or art, then you should be ok

  
  

  3) amount of the use – if you’re not taking the essence of the piece of work, or, you’re not making your work highly resemble the work of a copyrighted piece of work, you should be ok

  
  

  4) effect on the potential market for or value of the original – if by taking someone’s copyrighted work and using it with your own, you are not in essence stealing customers from that person, you should be ok.

  
  

  This is from Stanford University Libraries, and offers another look at copyright law and fair use:

  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

  A. What Is Fair Use? PREVIOUS NEXT

  In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and “transformative” purpose such as to comment upon, criticize or parody a copyrighted work. Such uses can be done without permission from the copyright owner. Another way of putting this is that fair use is a defense against infringement. If your use qualifies under the definition above, and as defined more specifically later in this chapter, then your use would not be considered an illegal infringement. So what is a “transformative” use? If this definition seems ambiguous or vague, be aware that millions of dollars in legal fees have been spent attempting to define what qualifies as a fair use. There are no hard-and-fast rules, only general rules and varying court decisions. That’s because the judges and lawmakers who created the fair use exception did not want to limit the definition of fair use. They wanted it–like free speech–to have an expansive meaning that could be open to interpretation. Most fair use analysis falls into two categories: commentary and criticism; or parody. 1. Comment and Criticism If you are commenting upon or critiquing a copyrighted work–for instance, writing a book review — fair use principles allow you to reproduce some of the work to achieve your purposes. Some examples of commentary and criticism include: quoting a few lines from a Bob Dylan song in a music review summarizing and quoting from a medical article on prostate cancer in a news report copying a few paragraphs from a news article for use by a teacher or student in a lesson, or copying a portion of a Sports Illustrated magazine article for use in a related court case. The underlying rationale of this rule is that the public benefits from your review, which is enhanced by including some of the copyrighted material. Additional examples of commentary or criticism are provided in the examples of fair use cases in Section C. 2. Parody A parody is a work that ridicules another, usually well-known work, by imitating it in a comic way. Judges understand that by its nature, parody demands some taking from the original work being parodied. Unlike other forms of fair use, a fairly extensive use of the original work is permitted in a parody in order to “conjure up” the original. For more information on copyright law, check out: http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/

  
  

  There’s a free legal lesson, and for me, a very useful one.  Experiential education at work.

  
  

   

  
  

  Sunday, May 23rd, 2004
  Fahrenheit 9/11 Wins Top Prize in Cannes

  
  

  Friends,

  
  

  Hello from Cannes! I’m sure by now many of you have heard the good news—“Fahrenheit 9/11” has won the top prize at the Cannes Film Festival. It is the first time in nearly 50 years a documentary has won the Palme d’Or (the Golden Palm).

  
  

  Myself and twenty-six members of our crew are here in Cannes and we are in a state of shock. None of us expected this. First came the critics’ reviews on Monday (The New York Times called it my best film ever), then the audience reaction at our premiere (a 20-minute standing ovation, a new all-time record for the festival), the International Federation of Film Critics Award on Friday, and then the best film prize last night. It’s all been an incredible week for us and I can’t wait to get back home and show you all this wonderfully powerful film we’ve made.

  
  

  No, we still don’t have a distributor in America as I write this but after winning the world’s top film prize I’d give it about one more day (if that) before we have someone brave enough (and smart enough) to show Americans what the world can already see (Albania, this week, became the final country—other than the U.S.—to sign on with a distributor).

  
  

  I am still hoping for a July release (4th of July weekend?) both in the U.S. and around the world.

  
  

  I fully expect the right wing and the Republican Party to come at me and this film with everything they’ve got. They will try, as they have unsuccessfully in the past, to attack me personally because they cannot win the debate on the issues the film raises—namely, that they are a pack of liars and the American people are on to them. And, if the early screenings of “Fahrenheit 9/11” are any indication, those who see this movie will never view the Bush administration in the same way again. Even if you already can’t stomach George W. Bush & Co., I think this movie will take you to places you haven’t gone before, with laughter and with tears.

  
  

  I will let you all know—as soon as we have a distributor—the date the film is opening. Until then, check out some of the articles that have been written, and check out the awards ceremony from Cannes.

  
  

  Thanks everyone for your support.

  
  

  Yours,
  Michael Moore
  mmflint@aol.com
  www.michaelmoore.com

  
  

  P.S. When you hear the wackos on Fox News and elsewhere refer to this prize as coming from “the French,” please know that of the nine members of the Festival jury, only ONE was French. Nearly half the jury (four) were Americans and the President of the jury was an American (Quentin Tarantino). But this fact won’t stop the O’Reillys or the Lenos or the Limbaughs from attacking the French and me because, well, that’s how their simple minds function.

  
  

   

  • 8:19 pm
  • Leave a comment