Courtney Bolin @FinneganIPLaw: Shot on iPhone: Media Group Found to Infringe “Simple Picture,” Court Rejects Fair Use Defense

[Cox is having a tough year, needs to take a serious look at their copyright advice.)

In copyright law, the fair use doctrine limits the control authors have over their copyrighted works by providing that others may use the copyrighted work in a reasonable manner without the author’s consent under some circumstances. Specifically, Section 107 of the Copyright Act provides that certain uses of a copyrighted work, such as news reporting, do not necessarily infringe a party’s copyright rights. However, in Cruz v. Cox Media, the Eastern District of New York held that fair use did not protect a media giant from copyright infringement liability resulting from its unauthorized use of a photograph in its news reporting.

Read the post on Finnegan

@neilturkewitz: Fair Use, Fairness and the Public Interest

In honor of Fair Use Week, let’s begin by unmasking the false premise underlying much of the celebration of fair use — that is, that the basic objective of the copyright system is to achieve a balance between the “public interest” on the one hand, and the interest of private copyright owners on the other. In this formulation, the “public” interest is exclusively defined as the ability to get copyrighted materials as cheaply as possible, with free obviously being the best (since it is the cheapest) option.

Many of the organizations celebrating fair use would have you believe that copyright protection and the public interest are diametrically opposed. This is merely a rhetorical device, and is a complete fallacy. Groups like EFF, Public Knowledge and re:Create employ emotive rhetoric in an attempt to demonize copyright, and to suggest that “copyright” protection is somehow a “special interest.”

Read the post on Medium.