Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
takedown_analysis [2017/02/19 08:54] – [Can Axanar Claim 'Prelude' Copyright?] edits to tighten, clarify Carlos Pedraza | takedown_analysis [Unknown date] (current) – external edit (Unknown date) 127.0.0.1 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
====== The Shoe is on the Other Foot ====== | ====== The Shoe is on the Other Foot ====== | ||
- | // | + | // |
{{TOC}} | {{TOC}} | ||
< | < | ||
Line 75: | Line 75: | ||
===== Can Axanar Claim ' | ===== Can Axanar Claim ' | ||
- | Unlike | + | Studios like CBS, Paramount, Lucasfilm and Disney have a clear copyright |
> Axanar does have a copyright in this film, at least in the original elements that they contributed. Even though it may be an unauthorized derivative work, the creator of the unauthorized derivative work still owns the copyright in it — even though the overall work may be infringing and he doesn' | > Axanar does have a copyright in this film, at least in the original elements that they contributed. Even though it may be an unauthorized derivative work, the creator of the unauthorized derivative work still owns the copyright in it — even though the overall work may be infringing and he doesn' | ||
Line 148: | Line 148: | ||
<WRAP tip> | <WRAP tip> | ||
[{{ : | [{{ : | ||
+ | |||
===== Fair Use Analysis ===== | ===== Fair Use Analysis ===== | ||
- | <wrap lo>As it turned out for Axanar in its lawsuit, a federal judge rejected its argument that // | + | <wrap lo>As it turned out for Axanar in its lawsuit, a federal judge rejected its argument that // |
**Is the video transformative? | **Is the video transformative? | ||
The fan editor would say yes to first under the theory that his cut comments on the original work and transforms it into a new interpretation. Posted for free on YouTube, and free of any surrounding commercial endeavors based on the work — which severely weakened Axanar' | The fan editor would say yes to first under the theory that his cut comments on the original work and transforms it into a new interpretation. Posted for free on YouTube, and free of any surrounding commercial endeavors based on the work — which severely weakened Axanar' | ||
\\ \\ | \\ \\ | ||
**Is the video a substitute for the original? Would people still want to buy the original after seeing the video?** \\ | **Is the video a substitute for the original? Would people still want to buy the original after seeing the video?** \\ | ||
- | Axanar could certainly argue the intent of the fan edit is precisely to substitute for the original. But Axanar is prohibited under the settlement from ever selling copies of // | + | Axanar could certainly argue the intent of the fan edit is precisely to substitute for the original. But Axanar is prohibited under the settlement from ever selling copies of // |
\\ \\ | \\ \\ | ||
**How much of the original work did the fan editor take, both quantitatively and qualitatively? | **How much of the original work did the fan editor take, both quantitatively and qualitatively? |