DotCom go BOOM*
Okay, this started as something fun …
The Richter Scales posted a paradoy song and video about the second coming of the Internet bubble. It’s catchy, it’s funny (especially for those of us who sort-of survived the first bubble) … and the original apparently used some copyrighted material without the permission of the owner.
I started to scan through the comments after Lane Hartwell’s entry and … wow.
I knew the Internets were full of people who weren’t too bright, who don’t understand the concept of copyright or how it’s applied. But, wow …
Ms. Hartwell’s copyright was infringed upon, so she set out to negotiate with the infringer. Without knowing more of the details, it seems they’re not willing to pay her. (The original video was viewed more than one million times.)
Some of the comments:
“alexjuno” – Get a life, you have WAY to much free time on your hands. It’s a picture, which isn’t a big deal! If you don’t want anyone to use your “famous” pictures, leave them off the net. This is one area you obviously don’t understand.
Um, no. Federal copyright laws do apply to the net.
“Ronni” – Why do you care if they use your image?! I don’t get you
Um, because it’s hers? And she makes a living off of her images?
Now, there are questioons as to whether this would constitute a derivative work or a parody, both of which would be protected under the fair use clauses of federal copyright law.
I’m not a lawyer, but … the photograph appears to have been used, without alteration, as a whole element. Yes, it’s within a collage of other images, but I’m not sure how that would affect a court’s ruling. And the image itself wasn’t being parodied, which would exempt that usage as well.
Again, not a lawyer. But it seems the original usage may have been a copyright violation.
(* Obscure reference to a text message I got years ago, some one person will appreciate it.)
This reminds me of a similar picture situation that happened a week or two ago.