Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Copyright complaint from Corbis
email | Feb 3, 2004 | Corbis

Posted on 02/23/2004 6:30:44 PM PST by Jim Robinson

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 241-245 next last
To: Jim Robinson
Hi Jim - I am not an expert in copyright law, but would suggest that if push comes to shove, which I hope it won't, your counsel will take a look at "fair use" doctrine. He/she probably already has, just a thought.
41 posted on 02/23/2004 7:00:12 PM PST by CobaltBlue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Jim,

Your answer to Corbis is excellent. If they have any sense, they will back off FreeRepublic after receiving it. In the event that they do not back off, here is a Plan B. Two years ago the US Supreme Court decided, in Roy Acuff Music v. U-2, that any use of copyrighted matter for a "parody or social commentary" is protected by the First Amendment. (U-2 had done a parody of Roy Orbison's "Pretty Woman" without asking permission.)

If Plan A doesn't work, Plan B should work.\

Cordially,

John / Billybob

42 posted on 02/23/2004 7:00:55 PM PST by Congressman Billybob (www.ArmorforCongress.com Visit. Join. Help. Please.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
What if the picture came from a site, that got it from a site, that took it from a site, that took it from Corbis?

What happens then Hmmmmm???
43 posted on 02/23/2004 7:01:05 PM PST by ThreePuttinDude (-)(-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClintonBeGone
Greed and selfishness have shredded our constitution about as much as a lot of other things have.

Sigh.
44 posted on 02/23/2004 7:02:14 PM PST by Quix (Choose this day whom U will serve: Shrillery & demonic goons or The King of Kings and Lord of Lords)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
Even a Weird Al Yankovic song parody is practically untouchable; add yet another layer for political free speech.

I wouldn't expect that to be the case, as music and lyrics are in some cases regarded separately at copyright law. As such, because Weird Al uses other people's music essentially verbatum, I'd expect that he'd have to pay for that. If he were to rework the tunes so as to be recognizable parody versions, then he wouldn't have to pay.

45 posted on 02/23/2004 7:02:29 PM PST by supercat (Why is it that the more "gun safety" laws are passed, the less safe my guns seem?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Scenic Sounds; Torie

FYI and ?
46 posted on 02/23/2004 7:03:39 PM PST by onyx (Your secrets are safe with me and all my friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
You don't understand the double standard syndrome. Democraps suffer a terrible version of it. THEY have an altrusitic NEED for exclusion from the rules. WE, however, are completely without valid reason for existence, much less poetic license. I think this battle COULD be won, but alas, were I Jim, I would choose my battles, and this little geek would be pretty far down the list.

BTW Cripple Creek?? About 40 miles from me! How'd ya end up with THAT handle? Just cuious....*grin*

Ms12Gauge aka Christine in Colorado.

47 posted on 02/23/2004 7:04:27 PM PST by Ms12Gauge (Colorado! Join us to restore your parental rights, and stop CPS from stealing your kids!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ThreePuttinDude
Dang. I knew i should have saved that picture. I went out to find it tonight and I can't, and my history is set to delete every 3 days.

Tasteful art is SO hard to find.
48 posted on 02/23/2004 7:04:37 PM PST by WayneM (Cut the KRAP (Karl Rove Amnesty Plan). Call your elected officials and say "NO!!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: ClintonBeGone
its whether Shanklin has or NEEDS permission from the creators of the songs he uses in his parodies.

He does not need permission for a parody. The Supreme Court held in the Pretty Woman case that taking for parody purposes is legal. However, given their more recent decision regarding the Campaign Finance Reform Act (political speech is not really entitled to protection) they might rule differently today.

BTW, Jim Rob needs no pointers regarding copyright law and the fair use concept. He's been there, done that and lost. I assume he has no wish to go through that again (why do you think stories from The Washington Post are always excerpted here?).

49 posted on 02/23/2004 7:04:44 PM PST by Martin Tell (I will not be terrified or Kerrified.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: MeekOneGOP; autoresponder; PhilDragoo

*ping* and pass it along
50 posted on 02/23/2004 7:05:11 PM PST by onyx (Your secrets are safe with me and all my friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: redlipstick
Memo to self: Do not darken the door of Corbis again.

Ever
51 posted on 02/23/2004 7:07:31 PM PST by cyncooper ("Maybe they thought Saddam would lose the next Iraqi election")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/index.html
52 posted on 02/23/2004 7:07:37 PM PST by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Sorry for the problems.

Interestingly enough, the picture is still up at commondreams.com

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0220-12.htm

Did they get a license to publish it, from Corvis?
53 posted on 02/23/2004 7:08:31 PM PST by FairOpinion (If you are not voting for Bush, you are voting for the terrorists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Why didn't they throw in a "doctor shopping" charge while they were at it?

Of course, this is political from the Big Boys. The Democrats' quest for the White House is at stake and any excuse to shut you down will be seized upon.

-PJ

54 posted on 02/23/2004 7:10:20 PM PST by Political Junkie Too (It's not safe yet to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000
Meet the owner of Corbis -

Are you sure Corbis doesn't own this picture? After all, it is a picture of Bill Gates, who happens to be the owner of Corbis.

55 posted on 02/23/2004 7:12:37 PM PST by Vision Thing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Could you post the offending Corbis pictures so we know what the offence is? :>)
57 posted on 02/23/2004 7:14:31 PM PST by irishtenor ("Trying is the first step toward failure." - Homer Simpson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
I wonder if the DUmmies ever posted that image over at that swamp, and if the Corbis edict applies to DUmmyville as well?

Prairie
58 posted on 02/23/2004 7:14:59 PM PST by prairiebreeze (The hope that danger has passed is comforting, is understandable, and it is FALSE! ~GWBush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000
Some believe the taking of a picture is akin to the stealing of a soul.

Alas, one must have a soul to steal to be affected.

Gates has no soul.

59 posted on 02/23/2004 7:16:46 PM PST by Thumper1960 ((Space for Rent or Lease))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Jim I think your replies are all right on.

I will note however that not even Mr. "R" is necessarily vulnerable to a lawsuit. Political parodies tend to have a leg up on copyrights. The Nader/Mastercard case I believe was a recent precedent setting example.

I'm sure you recall the E-Gray web site from the Simon campaign that my friend Chris and I built in the wee hours of the morning after far too many cold Killian's Reds back in September of 2002. (Our last count had over a million hits and links from 17 countries and thousands of other news accounts and blogs).

The nice folks at E-Bay and their oodles of lawyers tried to climb all over us, but I believe we never even replied to their queries.

Political speech is protected in this country (at least until 30 days before a federal election anyway.) I think "R" was stupid to not make the picture more of a parody and less of a forgery, but he would still have a good case if they went after him. As you noted, you are totally in the clear, IMHO.
60 posted on 02/23/2004 7:16:59 PM PST by ElkGroveDan (Fighting for Freedom and Having Fun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 241-245 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson