Word: copyright
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...legal because last week the Supreme Court ruled, 5 to 4, that home videotaping of television programs for private use is not a violation of copyright law. The anxiously awaited decision grew out of a suit brought by the Disney and Universal studios in 1976 against the Sony Corp., makers of Betamax videocassette recorders (VCRS), for enabling home viewers to record movies and TV shows without paying a royalty. In 1981 a federal appeals court in California decided in favor of the studios. Since then the billion-dollar VCR industry, as well as millions of consumers, has been...
...decision, the court held that "time-shifting," the recording of a program for later viewing at a more convenient time, constituted "fair use" of copyrighted material. Wrote Justice John Paul Stevens for the majority: "One may search the Copyright Act in vain for any sign that the elected representatives of the millions of people who watch television every day have made it unlawful to copy a program for later viewing at home." The court found, moreover, that Disney and Universal-and, by extension, the entertainment industry-had failed to prove that the practice caused them financial injury or damaged...
Kaufman noted that Editor Victor Navasky of the Nation had paraphrased most of what Ford wrote. Only 300 words of the 2,250-word article were taken verbatim from the manuscript. This brief borrowing of copyrighted material without the author's consent, said the court, was "fair use," a concept that allows limited quotation by journalists, critics, teachers and researchers. Dissenting Judge Thomas Meskill found a problem in the straightforward nature of the paraphrasing, however. "Copyright laws protect originality," he wrote. "They thus offer protection against a work that is substantially an unoriginal appropriation of the copyrighted work...
...jubilant Navasky hailed the ruling as "a victory for the public." But some legal experts contend that the decision's scope might not be as broad as Kaufman's resounding language suggests. The reigning scholar of copyright law, Melville Nimmer of U.C.L.A. law school, said the "essential element" in the case is that "the underlying material is factual." Paraphrasing of fictional material would still violate copyright laws. Columbia Law Professor Benno Schmidt also did not quarrel with the decision but added, "The appropriate principles of copyright protection got bent out of shape by the tremendous newsworthiness...
...week's end the publishers had not decided, but were leaning toward seeking further review. Edward Miller, general counsel for Harper & Row, insisted that an important issue is at stake. Said he: "Copyright is the basis of the business we're in, and first serial rights are an important source of income for us." Whatever the final outcome of the case, publishers are considering new tactics to avoid such battles. Some warn that galleys of major books will be offered to fewer bidders with more stringent security restrictions. Others, like Roger Straus, president of Farrar, Straus & Giroux, think...