Comments on: Why “Piracy” is the biggest strawman of them all

By: the aseanist » Blog Archive » The Opposite of Antitrust, Part 1

the aseanist » Blog Archive » The Opposite of Antitrust, Part 1 — Fri, 15 Apr 2005 04:09:05 +0000

[...] itrust, Part 1 Over the past week, I’ve been following a discussion here, here and here that tracks the classic legal debat [...]

By: Karate Kid

Karate Kid — Wed, 06 Apr 2005 07:31:21 +0000

You’re a bad influence.

I’ve jumped into the fray. More like fallen when pushed. Nudged, more like, by that last post. My take on copyright is there.

Tell me, as usual, what you make of it all.

By: ivan

ivan — Tue, 05 Apr 2005 14:56:53 +0000

han: compass ain’t the courts. And size doesn’t matter, quality does

35(2): the matters to which regard shall be had, in determining whether a dealing with a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work or with an adaptation of a literary, dramatic or musical work, being a dealing by way of copying the whole or a part of the work or adaptation, constitutes a fair dealing with the work or adaptation for any purpose other than a purpose referred to in section 36 or 37 shall include:

In regarding if sampling if a infringement, the 5 factors will be considered. It has already been said that in determining if a substantial part has been copied, it a qualitative excercise not quantitative. Thus if quantitatively a non-substantial (de minimis) part has been copied, it will nto be an infringement.

Have there been any mash up court cases? i think it has all been settled, or warded off due to fright tactics.

By: Han

Han — Tue, 05 Apr 2005 09:46:05 +0000

ivan:

COMPASS explicitly says that no amount of sampling is legal, regardless of size of the sample.

I checked up with Statutes Online, and as far as I can tell, the fair use provisions don’t seem to have anything that could be construed as exceptions for de minimis sampling.

I agree with you that fair use provisions should be expanded and strengthened… but I fear with the current balance of power, that appears to be a remote hope.

By: Wannabe Lawyer » Blog Archive » My previous post is incomplete without reading this

Tue, 05 Apr 2005 05:00:15 +0000

[...] se someone once told me that I’m a contentious bastard.

« Why “Piracy” is the biggest strawman of them all [...]

By: From a Singapore Angle: Still on copyrights

From a Singapore Angle: Still on copyrights — Tue, 05 Apr 2005 03:35:31 +0000

Ok, my extended reply is in the trackback.

By: ivan

ivan — Tue, 05 Apr 2005 00:32:33 +0000

shit! now i sound like a damn twit… brain’s not functioning… the work needs to be deemed as original as well before it can be copyrighted maybe han can help me edit my comments.

By: ivan

ivan — Tue, 05 Apr 2005 00:30:04 +0000

oops a clarification of my clarification LOL.
“Everything can be copyrighted…/” as long as you can classify it as a “work”, ie. you say your love letter is a product of your work, or you tape you mom’s nagging/your baby’s cries and claim it as your work.

By: Han

Han — Tue, 05 Apr 2005 00:27:06 +0000

huichieh:

I hope you don’t misunderstand. I wasn’t criticising you at all. I was criticising Henninger. And yes, I do address Henninger’s cheap shot at the end of his editorial, and the flawed reasoning contained within.

By: From a Singapore Angle: On copyright

Not read your post carefully yet, but just a quick comment first.

On Henninger…please…I cited his article not because he is some authority on economics (who cares?), but because I thought he gave voice to a line of reasoning concerning copyrights that is worth considering, and because of his observation that the underlying issue is ideological much more than anything else, something that I wholeheartedly agree with.

I could be wrong–Henninger could be wrong–but I would prefer that the reasoning, especially the bits I highlighted on my own post be replied to (much like CW on the comments to John’s post, I suppose)…

Ok, that said, I will now make an effort to read your long post carefully.