
YARRRRRR
And I believe the current trend against IP violations is trying to get the courts to enforce their belief that Fair Use isn't a defensible use, it's only a defense in court. Meaning even if you're in the right, they have the right to run you through the ringer (just like we always thought, except it isn't all :tinfoil: - it's documented action).mirkosp wrote:More than what you think, actually... most people aren't aware of that, or just say that amv are legal under fair use...Pwolf wrote:I wonder how many editors here edit and make amvs and don't realize it's illegal?
Nope. What about the independent labels that actually follow ethical norms and treat their fans with respect, while having reasonable rules on ways in which the music could be used?Eva-Fan wrote:Global
Wide
Music
Strike
Go!
Not true, at least not according to what I've been thought. Those precedents didn't just come out of nowhere. It would have been a judge that through some thought process and evaluation of the facts and conditions, came to a conclusion that this is the right direction and consequently becomes law. So in effect, some case probably needs to be fought out there to serve as an example... trouble is, you versus big money studio, I'd put my money on the company.Sukunai wrote:Laws are about things like precedent and the letter of the law. But they aren't about thinking. Judges don't really judge, they are just there to manage.