Fair Use Definition

Throughout the video Faden uses a wide variety of clips from different Disney but he never uses more than he needs to. The University of Maryland University College’s guidelines for how much of a copyrighted work you can use include only using the amount you need, and not exceeding the expectation of how much you can use. Faden demonstrates this by using only what he needs to get his point

The copyright on Eric Faden is fair use because it’s used to teach kids about copyright laws. He is not making any money off of the remix. He is not looking in making profit, he is simply educating. He borrowed very small pieces of Disney films to transform into a remix. He also cited all the movies he took, and gave credit to disney. Some people say it’s copyright because he didn’t get permission from Disney.

Plaintiff Argues: Miller based his argument to the Supreme Court on a previous case Memoirs v. Massachusetts, which decided that the “patently offensive” and information that was “utterly without redeeming social value” was not covered under the 1st Amendment, and it was difficult to prove that works are without any redeeming social value. Miller’s other main argument was that his arrest violated his 1st Amendment right to free speech no that he was censored and arrested by the Orange Count Police Department unlawfully.

On May 30 of 2017, Judge Pauley dismissed the suit. “’This is precisely the type of use that 'adds something new, with a further purpose or different character, altering the first [work] with new expression, meaning, or message,' the judge wrote, quoting U.S. Supreme Court precedent on fair use” (Donahue,

With endless copyright laws and fine lines of right and wrong Eric Faden created a video using short clips from disney animation studios to test the limits of fair use. Walt disney studios is known for suing schools, churches , and public libraries for broadcasting their movies and animations without permission(which is never given). Once again disney has proved their reputation by by filing a lawsuit against eric faden whom abided by the copyright rules. I can only imagine Disney’s lawyers heads spinning off as they watched the “movie”.

Fair use, a well-established doctrine of copyright law, is explicitly stated in Title 17, Section 107 of the U.S. Code. It protects copying “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research.” Also very relevant to the issues raised by this lawsuit is the final

The second approach to copyright is the democratic approach. All works of art are ideas built on a foundation of other ideas. The democratic approach advocates that intellectual property belongs to the society and should be available for the general good of the public. If the particular usage is intended to derive financial benefit or any other business-related benefits, it is considered inappropriate usage. If the utilization of factual work were more usable than the use of someone’s creative work, then that would not be fair use. There is no specified edge to the amount of quoted work that can be called “fair use.” The courts exercise common sense to determine if it was too much. If the utilization of the material created market or stirred a competition, and if the fair use diminishes demand for the original product, it is not considered as appropriate use (Crews, 1993).

When people think of parodies, they think of music videos, movies, and skits that are made for the purpose of making fun of an existing music video, movie, or skit that was created under a serious context. The definition of parody is “the imitation of an artist, writer, or genre with deliberate exaggeration for comedic effect.” Parodies are all very different in content, but the basic formula to make one is the same and all parodies aim to have the same goal: to make people laugh. In video parodies, there is always a subject taken to poke fun at, specific video editing similar to the original video, and characters that play over-exaggerated and often ridiculous caricatures of their original counterparts. For a website like College Humor, that produces watchable internet content, such as parodies of popular television shows, this means creating a show called “Precious Plum” based off of the hit-television show “Here Comes Honey Boo Boo”.

In this case the source of law that which the lawsuit is based on is the United States Constitution, specifically the 1st and 14th amendments. The 1st amendment which provides the right to freedom of speech and the 14th amendment, which provides equal protection of the law to all citizens.

Unfortunately, the only way to get a definitive answer on whether a particular use is a fair use is to have it resolved in federal court. Judges use four factors to resolve fair use disputes, as discussed in detail below. It’s important to understand that these factors are only guidelines that courts are free to adapt to particular situations on a case‑by‑case basis. In other words, a judge has a great deal of freedom when making a fair use determination, so the outcome in any given case can be hard to predict. - See more at:

The first thing that should be done before anything else in this case, is the proper definition of fair use. Merriam Webster’s defines fair use as the following: a legal doctrine that portions of copyrighted materials may be used without permission of the copyright owner provided the use is fair and reasonable, does not substantially impair the value of the materials, and does not curtail the profits reasonably expected by the owner. The U.S. Copyright office states that these are the activities that can be claimed as fair use: criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. So to further analyze fair use, I shall share some observations. Fair use can be claimed if it does not substantially impair the worth of the movies used in the video, or lose any money for disney. The strategy can also be used if it is used in the context of criticizing, reporting, or providing commentary on something. Teaching, research, and scholarship are also forms protected by copyright.

In light of these three cases the defense of parody may be disregarded if the plaintiff can argue priority, since the marks are registered in the principle register and have established their mark in the market. Secondly, the defendant has infringed the mark arguably on four counts, through semantics, with the use of ‘pel’ and No. 13 which are both distinctive and non-functional when used together, hence infringes the plaintiffs mark, Chapel and Chapel No. 13 (the argument for Chapel No.13 are stronger). Secondly, they use the same type of dress i.e. astronaut dress and lastly the color i.e. gold. The last two counts are arguable trade dresses but are worth mentioning for the purposes of proving that the defendant did intend to create an association

Fair use is a defense to copyright infringement that essentially asks of any particular use; Is this fair?

In making a series on real Greek myths and epics, I would need to ensure that I am abiding by all copyright laws. Although, my idea is on a principle theme that others have attempted, I would need to take preventive measure, so I would not fall victim to copyright infringement. In doing so, I would apply fair use in determining what and what not to use. First, plan of action; I would use the clips from the 1963 movie Jason and the Argonauts. Since the film was made in 1963 public domain is applied, therefore, usage of the film is free anyone. Secondly, I anticipate on using clips to express accuracy and the disparity of Greek mythology vs Hollywood films. Therefore, I would use for example, Brad Pitt’s movie Troy with an

The Fair Use Act is when a teacher or student is allowed to take something off the internet for educational purposes.