Is it protected or shared with our friends?

[Maeve_Mari]

We can start here: How to reconcile aged copywrite infringement laws and current rulings on speech and privacy with regard to the impact of the internet? Can our TiVo recording of the Fencing National Championships be posted on a private site for posting among the fencing.net membership?

Originally Posted by Inquartata

Countdown until someone objects about copyright infringement:

10...

9...

8...

Originally Posted by Maeve_Mari

I'd like to see it challenged.
Internet has advanced beyond the laws that govern information protection and copywrite and it's high time they took a look at alternative mediums and rewrote the laws and guides to accomodate.

Attorney anyone?

[Philistine]

In what sense would you rewrite the laws?

To my way of thinking, the advancement is more in terms of access then it is philosophical. Meaning, I think that the basis for copyright (and other intellectual property protection) is still valid--but that internet and easy copying of digital information (as well as analog music and video) have greatly eroded the protection.

Distribution channels haven't caught up to what is often times freely available through file-sharing, but this again isn't really a philisophical reason to change copyright to me--but rather an argument to change distribution methods.

--Philistine

[Iwant2bafencer]

As for the TiVo recording itself I would say yes, it can go on the site. As long as you're not selling it to the site or using it to make any form of money. Technically speaking you're using it for educational purouses which I believe is lawful under the copywrite laws.

[Philistine]

Originally Posted by Iwant2bafencer

As for the TiVo recording itself I would say yes, it can go on the site. As long as you're not selling it to the site or using it to make any form of money.

Although whether or not you are making money from a copyrighted work is one factor to look at (out of four) it is absolutely not the only (or even main) consideration.

Technically speaking you're using it for educational purouses which I believe is lawful under the copywrite laws.

While educational purposes is one type of use which is recognized as being a "fair use," it again is not dispostive.

I'd rather not actually get into a debate on whether posting the file would be a violation of copyright--for a number of reasons.

In any event, I find the debate on what to do with copyright more interesting.

--Philistine

[Artisan]

Originally Posted by Iwant2bafencer

... Technically speaking you're using it for educational purouses which I believe is lawful under the copywrite laws.

I'm not so sure about that... can I photocopy text books and give them to students?

[telkanuru]

How 'bout screw copyright laws, show me fencing

[epeemike81]

Originally Posted by Iwant2bafencer

As for the TiVo recording itself I would say yes, it can go on the site. As long as you're not selling it to the site or using it to make any form of money. Technically speaking you're using it for educational purouses which I believe is lawful under the copywrite laws.

not sure about this...

we could always create a voice-over cracking jokes and have it be legal under the parody exception.

-m

[The0ne]

I agree with telkanuru!!

[Maeve_Mari]

I want to know how, posting the recording on here for the membership's personal viewing is any different than video taping the sporting event on VHS and having the club members come over with chips and dip to watch it in my (your) home.

There is not any infringement of copywrite protections when you show a home copied video at home, could we argue that this chat board is a new internet-age home?

[Philistine]

Originally Posted by Maeve_Mari

I want to know how, posting the recording on here for the membership's personal viewing is any different than video taping the sporting event on VHS and having the club members come over with chips and dip to watch it in my (your) home.

There is not any infringement of copywrite protections when you show a home copied video at home, could we argue that this chat board is a new internet-age home?

The difference is because the specific rights are different--performance versus distribution.

By broadcasting, the copyright owner is granting you permission to view (performance) the action (and ostensibly anyone who you bring in). Putting it online implicates the distribution right part of copyrights. In the same sense that you can tape a movie (off of broadcast) but you can't make copies and send it off to your 25 closest friends, even though you could invite them over to view the tape.

--Philistine

[Maeve_Mari]

Originally Posted by Philistine

[/b]

The difference is because the specific rights are different--performance versus distribution.

By broadcasting, the copyright owner is granting you permission to view (performance) the action (and ostensibly anyone who you bring in). Putting it online implicates the distribution right part of copyrights. In the same sense that you can tape a movie (off of broadcast) but you can't make copies and send it off to your 25 closest friends, even though you could invite them over to view the tape.

--Philistine

It would be within the boundry of acceptable use for me to save the recorded file of the championships on to my personal server or workspace.

And it would be within the boundry of acceptable use for me to invite friends over to view the recorded file on my monitor.

And it would be within the boundries of acceptable use for me to save the file on my networked file server and watch the action on a monitor in the next room with my friends and a bowl of cheese doodles.

And if I were at work using the IP address of my networked home server that is running PC Anywhere, it would still be within the boundry of acceptable use that I could view the recorded file while at the office with a few more of my friends.

And it goes on, until the line between personal and acceptable use and distributed access is crossed. The problem with the traditional definition of personal use is how it is amplified in a global e-world. Here on fencing.net we could limit viewing to members (friends) and since the viewing would be a) instructional, b) entertainment, and c) not for profit or benefit to any manager or owner of fencing.net. And without any copywrite issues being violated.

What do you think of the reasoning?

[Philistine]

Originally Posted by Maeve_Mari

{snip}
What do you think of the reasoning?

The problem I see is that you make a jump--not for any philisophical reason, but because technology allows you to do so.

While you are generally all right (at least for the home--"home use" for timeshifting has been upheld by the court) it gets a bit more dodgy for getting it at work--though not necessarily prohibitively so (but as the # of people you are showing it to outside of the home increases, the likelihood that a court would call it an infringement increases).

However, again, it's the same issue with distribution. Just as you couldn't make tapes of a TV show and give them to a set # of people--there are problems with making a file available for download--even to a set # of people, and the problem increases where there is no actual limit on the potential people downloading it.

What would you suggest as a change in copyright law? How do you distinguish something like hosting one particular sporting event because it would be "educational" with hosting a scanned copy of a movie which has fencing in it or a book on fencing, because they would also be "educational"?


NB: I am not an IP attorney--this is NOT legal advice

--Philistine

[Iwant2bafencer]

Artisan, of course you can't copy the entire text to give to your students, however bits and pieces are fine (at least my teachers do that). So perhaps not the entire program, but a bout here or there.

[Hamley]

Wouldnt you officaly own it because you made the movie. Tivo just a device that helps you get it, like the recorder you use. Unless the Nationals are going to be on tv....which i hight dought.



Noah

[oiuyt]

Hamley- The source of the TIVO'd data is from TV. The program will be shown on CSTV (College Sports Television).

Just to confuse the issue, the USFA has a copy of the program which they've made and distributed a (very) limited number of copies of. Specifically anyone in the final four of any of the events got a copy and every member of the BoD got a copy. The letter that went with the DVD specified that, due to cost reasons, the USFA would not be making additional copies available, but that the recipients of the DVD/letter could. Of course unless these people have a DVD burner available that's kind of a moot point.

Good production quality. Lots of MF and WS, reasonable amount of MS, just highlights of WF (VERY little WF), WE, and ME. Commentary of the action by Suzie Paxton (who does a good job) and someone else who sounds like he's new to fencing. Lots of information for the viewer via the guy asking Suzie questions and her clarifying what just happened. Little foil/epee/sabre 101 interludes to explain the weapons featuring top fencers (1 male, 1 female each time, mostly although not exclusively fencing their weapon). The interludes are well scripted and presented.

Also on the DVD are the Today show appearance of Keeth and Sada, and clips of a couple of other shows that involved fencing (a show for kids that had a fencing segment, a Letterman's Top 10 that included Keeth reading #3 in Perks of Being an Olympic Athlete: "Having your life story turned into a melodramic montage narrated by Bob Costas", etc.).

Wonder what rights of distribution the USFA actually has and how transferable those rights are to the group of people that the DVD went to.

-B :)

[Capt. Slo-mo]

Originally Posted by Maeve_Mari

Here on fencing.net we could limit viewing to members (friends) and since the viewing would be a) instructional, b) entertainment, and c) not for profit or benefit to any manager or owner of fencing.net. And without any copywrite issues being violated.

Maeve: When you talk about posting the TiVo here on Fencing.net, then it could be construed as being of commercial benefit to the site. Craig has banner ads here. He sells material through the store. Hosting copyrighted material on the site to boost or retain viewership/interest in Fencing.net would likely not be a "fair use" scenario. If I were the legal counsel for CSTV, I'd probably jump all over that argument.

Still, you bring up an argument that has disturbed the TV industry for some time now. When it was pirate VHS tapes, or stolen HBO signals in a bar, it was a pretty clear cut case. But with the advent of so much digital encoding for music and movies, the ease of transferring copyrighted material has created new problems. Central to that is the "server" concept, where you store digitized material, but can provide access to legions of people who would otherwise have to buy/watch the material themselves...all with no direct "distribution" activity on your part.

Here's the thinking of the TV industry for something like this: CSTV paid money to produce the championships programming. They sell advertising to re-imburse themselves. Ad rates are based on the number of eyeballs watching the show during the broadcast. Just as CSTV gets no revenue benefit if you record the show on VHS and then show it to your friends, they get no ratings spike if you TiVo it and everyone on Fencing.net sees it.

In fact, they would make the argument that if they freely allowed you (and others) to do so regularly, then there would be no incentive for normal viewers to take the trouble to actually watch their broadcasts--and see the commercials. This would damage their ratings, lower the rates they can charge...you get the drift.

There's another issue intimately related to digital recordings. One of the main things CSTV or ESPN or NBC Sports doesn't want to see is their expensively produced programming end up on a competitor's network. Here's how it could happen:

Someone in your club is featured on the Sports Illustrated for Kids TV show. They TiVo the broadcast and burn it onto a DVD. A couple of years later, the fencer is the subject of an "up close and personal" profile for inclusion into CSTV programming. When the crew from CSTV is at your club, someone says..."Hey, I've got some digital video on DVD of Suzy Hackenslash when she was a Cadet fencer!" The producer from CSTV doesn't ask a lot of questions, the club manager signs off on an acquired video release form (which they don't actually have the authority to sign), the video is folded into the program, and Bammo! instant copyright violation.

In part, that's why most networks went to the "bug" on their broadcast video. It's the little translucent logo, usually in the bottom right hand corner of the screen, intended to identify the source of the video. The bug became nearly universal after several cases of "pirated" video where a competitior took video off a satellite feed without authorization and used it as their own.

Now, to your situation. Is it likely that CSTV would find out about the fencing video, if you posted it on Fencing.net? Probably not. If they did, would they pursue it vigorously? Probably not. Should Craig assume the liability for hosting clearly copyrighted material without consulting an attorney? Probably not.

[Army Fencer]

Warning. Random Post.

You know, I saw this thread title WAY too close to the sex thread.

As a member of the health care community, I have to say it's best to be protected.

[epeemike81]

Originally Posted by Army Fencer

Warning. Random Post.

You know, I saw this thread title WAY too close to the sex thread.

As a member of the health care community, I have to say it's best to be protected.

-m