If sampling is illegal, what about other comparable uses of copyrighted materials? Does the five words above -in violation of copyright law- without citations constitute copyright infringement? Is the documentary film "Super Size Me" totally illegal since the director did not have McDonald's written permission to feature them in the film?
"Get a license or do not sample" is a dangerous tipping point on a slippery slop. Such a court decision invites a flood of new cases that challenge accepted standards in the fair use clause.
We live in a world infused with copyrighted works. What kind of a society would it be if we were not allowed to take pictures with any copyrighted logos in the background without first getting a license? Should street performers in NYC be required to get licenses before singing in the subways? This could be the death of parodies, too! Where would it end? What are the boundaries?
I leave you with some word from the Chief Judge in the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Alex Kozinski:
“Overprotecting intellectual property is as harmful as underprotecting it. Culture is impossible without a rich public domain. Nothing today, likely nothing since we tamed fire, is genuinely new: Culture, like science and technology, grows by accretion, each new creator building on the works of those who came before. Overprotection stifles the very creative forces it’s supposed to nurture.”
* Dissenting in the White v. Samsung Elec. Am., Inc., 989 F.2d 1512 (9th Cir. 1993) ruling.
No comments:
Post a Comment