Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's interesting that the law now makes colleges and universities legally responsible for students who pirate music, movies, etc. Where I am at, the University monitors how students use the Internet, meaning how much data they are downloading, and charges students in student court if they infringing on the copyright of others.
Yes, definitely, but given the Copyright Extension Act, we would only be hearing REALLY OLD tunes at the RNC.
Scott Joplin was considered controversial in his day.
You mean the way Rush Limbaugh a few times a day uses the Pretender's song Ohio all during his show?
No, just so many are liberals that they get upset if non-libs use their songs.
Good news is this alerts non-libs to avoid buying their music or going to their concerts in some Indian casino again. Goes both ways.
My, how the advocates of the sanctity of property rights are so dismissive when it comes to other people's property rights.
Your link only illustrates the aspects of limited exclusive rights for authors. What are you trying to argue exactly? REM and Warner have to give permission for their work to be used and have the right to royalties when their property is used, depending on the agreement between REM and Warner that would be for the duration of either author's life plus 70 years or, if Warner is the majority owner, 120 years since authorship or 95 years since publication of the work. Corporate entities like Fox don't get to benefit from fair use, unless Fox was going to use the argument that it was critiquing the song, which obviously isn't the case. It was using the song to critique the DNC.
MSN can use Fox clips because the clips are being critiqued. The REM song was not being critiqued by Fox.
You should really learn about intellectual property law before accusing others of not knowing anything about the subject.
There isnt a dam thing I got wrong on my posting because REM nor Warner is required to give permission for use of their work under the Fair Use laws. There are MULTIPLE sections of the code and I'm not going to do your homework for you because you want to believe crap that isnt true.
In fact you are so far out of the park that I wonder where the hell you got your law degree.. In 1961, the General Revisions of the US Copyright laws specificially authorized Fair Use for
"in a news report"
Furthermore, most radio and tv statiions pay a flat rate license fee to the industry for permission to use what they want during the course of the year, and the artist has no dam say so whatsoever.
I believe there is a little bit of a communication gap with the republicans on this thread. I don't think the point of the thread was whether the use of the music was legal, but the fact that so many artists disapprove of the Republicans using their music to promote their agenda...they don't want to be associated with the Republicans.
I know there are a lot of wannabe lawyers on this thread, but the thread is not about the law.
Perhaps the thread should had been titled differently then, eh?
The charge has already been made in the court of public opinion by the copyright holder. A simply apology on Fox's part is probably all that would be needed, though I would love to see REM sue just to make a point about copyright.
An apology for what? FOX says they aren't doing anything at all illegal. Here's a statement,
Quote:
"A Fox News spokesman responds: “FOX News Channel’s use of an R.E.M. song during Thursday’s edition of Fox & Friends was in full accordance with its license agreements with all appropriate parties. Nevertheless, we’re always flattered to have this much attention for a song selection and we hope R.E.M. was able to satisfy their publicity fix.”
Furthermore, most radio and tv statiions pay a flat rate license fee to the industry for permission to use what they want during the course of the year, and the artist has no dam say so whatsoever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Keegan
]"A Fox News spokesman responds: “FOX News Channel’s use of an R.E.M. song during Thursday’s edition of Fox & Friends was in full accordance with its license agreements with all appropriate parties. Nevertheless, we’re always flattered to have this much attention for a song selection and we hope R.E.M. was able to satisfy their publicity fix.”
Thank you or once again validating what I said is true.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
