WEBVTT - Rerun: Copyright and Fair Use

0:00:04.400 --> 0:00:07.760
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to Tech Stuff, a production from my Heart Radio.

0:00:12.039 --> 0:00:16.439
<v Speaker 1>Hey there, folks, Jonathan Strickland. Here. No normal intro for today.

0:00:16.480 --> 0:00:19.560
<v Speaker 1>We're gonna do a rerun because I'm under the weather

0:00:19.680 --> 0:00:23.239
<v Speaker 1>and it's a crazy holiday week with Thanksgiving week here

0:00:23.239 --> 0:00:26.759
<v Speaker 1>in in the United States, and uh, it just all

0:00:26.760 --> 0:00:29.160
<v Speaker 1>my efforts to put together a new episode kind of

0:00:29.160 --> 0:00:32.159
<v Speaker 1>fell apart. But I do plan on having a news

0:00:32.200 --> 0:00:34.720
<v Speaker 1>episode tomorrow, and in the meantime, I didn't want to

0:00:34.800 --> 0:00:37.600
<v Speaker 1>leave you without anything. So I looked back on last

0:00:37.680 --> 0:00:40.480
<v Speaker 1>year and there was this episode about copyright and fair

0:00:40.600 --> 0:00:43.479
<v Speaker 1>use I did, and I thought, hey, I'm gonna essentially

0:00:43.520 --> 0:00:47.080
<v Speaker 1>plagiarize myself and copy myself, so why not do the

0:00:47.080 --> 0:00:52.200
<v Speaker 1>copyright and fair use episode. It originally published on May one.

0:00:52.600 --> 0:00:57.200
<v Speaker 1>I think it's an important topic to really educate yourself

0:00:57.240 --> 0:01:01.040
<v Speaker 1>about in the tech space in particular, as uh, the

0:01:01.080 --> 0:01:06.400
<v Speaker 1>Internet in general and the Web really specifically have created

0:01:07.959 --> 0:01:12.720
<v Speaker 1>the foundation for rampant copyright abuse. And you know there

0:01:12.760 --> 0:01:16.440
<v Speaker 1>are multiple sites that story. So let's listen to this

0:01:16.520 --> 0:01:20.240
<v Speaker 1>episode that published last year on copyright and fair use,

0:01:20.360 --> 0:01:26.280
<v Speaker 1>and I'll chat with you again really soon. It has

0:01:26.319 --> 0:01:28.959
<v Speaker 1>been a while since I've done an episode about the

0:01:29.040 --> 0:01:33.400
<v Speaker 1>concepts of copyright and fair use. And after I keep

0:01:33.400 --> 0:01:38.040
<v Speaker 1>seeing the phrase no copyright infringement intended over and over

0:01:38.160 --> 0:01:42.399
<v Speaker 1>on places like YouTube and Instagram, I figure it's a

0:01:42.480 --> 0:01:46.240
<v Speaker 1>good time to tackle this again. Because people continue to

0:01:46.319 --> 0:01:53.440
<v Speaker 1>pretend like copyright infringement only applies under very specific circumstances

0:01:54.040 --> 0:01:57.040
<v Speaker 1>and that with just a little bit of verbiage you

0:01:57.080 --> 0:02:00.280
<v Speaker 1>can get around it, when really the opposite is true.

0:02:00.560 --> 0:02:03.640
<v Speaker 1>And since the Internet and technology allows for more opportunities

0:02:03.680 --> 0:02:09.360
<v Speaker 1>for a copyright infringement, and because various governments and around

0:02:09.400 --> 0:02:12.480
<v Speaker 1>the world have passed legislation to you know, specifically tackle

0:02:12.520 --> 0:02:18.679
<v Speaker 1>copyright infringement, and companies have lobbied endlessly for more restrictive

0:02:18.760 --> 0:02:23.600
<v Speaker 1>copyright rules, I think it fits the scope of tech stuff,

0:02:23.600 --> 0:02:27.560
<v Speaker 1>particularly since a lot of these laws were formed in

0:02:27.639 --> 0:02:32.440
<v Speaker 1>reaction to changes in technology. So first, let's kind of

0:02:32.680 --> 0:02:39.040
<v Speaker 1>define what copyright is now. Essentially, copyright guarantees the creator

0:02:39.080 --> 0:02:42.440
<v Speaker 1>of a work or an entity that has been designated

0:02:42.520 --> 0:02:46.320
<v Speaker 1>by the creator of the work, the right to profit

0:02:46.600 --> 0:02:51.360
<v Speaker 1>off of that work, the right to make copies of

0:02:51.440 --> 0:02:56.120
<v Speaker 1>that work and then distribute or sell them, or you know,

0:02:56.200 --> 0:02:59.440
<v Speaker 1>you just you own that intellectual property. No one else

0:02:59.480 --> 0:03:02.519
<v Speaker 1>can come and make copies of it without your permission.

0:03:03.120 --> 0:03:06.639
<v Speaker 1>The works in this case range from the written word

0:03:06.919 --> 0:03:12.679
<v Speaker 1>to music, to paintings, sculpture, uh to digital files. I mean,

0:03:12.720 --> 0:03:15.440
<v Speaker 1>copyright now applies to lots of stuff. Clearly it didn't

0:03:15.480 --> 0:03:18.280
<v Speaker 1>apply to all of that in the beginning, but something

0:03:18.320 --> 0:03:22.400
<v Speaker 1>that has evolved over time. It does not include inventions.

0:03:22.440 --> 0:03:26.320
<v Speaker 1>Those are covered under patent law. And then you also

0:03:26.360 --> 0:03:30.000
<v Speaker 1>have things like trademarks, which make things more complicated. I

0:03:30.080 --> 0:03:34.560
<v Speaker 1>might talk about trademarks and copyright in a future episode

0:03:35.080 --> 0:03:38.080
<v Speaker 1>to kind of talk about how those complicate things, because

0:03:38.080 --> 0:03:42.080
<v Speaker 1>companies have tried to use trademarks in order to extend

0:03:42.160 --> 0:03:49.160
<v Speaker 1>copyright protection. But trademarks last in perpetuity. Copyright only lasts

0:03:49.480 --> 0:03:52.600
<v Speaker 1>a certain amount of time, at least in theory. We'll

0:03:52.640 --> 0:03:55.120
<v Speaker 1>get to all that. So along with the right to

0:03:55.400 --> 0:04:00.360
<v Speaker 1>profit from intellectual property comes with it protections against others

0:04:00.400 --> 0:04:02.640
<v Speaker 1>who are taking a work and profiting off of it

0:04:03.120 --> 0:04:06.960
<v Speaker 1>without permission. Now you can see the value of this

0:04:07.080 --> 0:04:11.280
<v Speaker 1>concept right away, I imagine. So let's say you are

0:04:11.320 --> 0:04:15.640
<v Speaker 1>a musician and you write a song. It was your work.

0:04:16.160 --> 0:04:18.800
<v Speaker 1>You created the whole piece, You wrote the music, and

0:04:18.880 --> 0:04:22.120
<v Speaker 1>you wrote the lyrics and you plan to earn money

0:04:22.400 --> 0:04:25.000
<v Speaker 1>through this song. Maybe you're going to record it to

0:04:25.120 --> 0:04:28.840
<v Speaker 1>some form of media and then sell copies of the song.

0:04:29.160 --> 0:04:32.240
<v Speaker 1>So you filed a copyright for the song, which gives

0:04:32.279 --> 0:04:35.800
<v Speaker 1>you the exclusive rights to make copies of it uh

0:04:36.200 --> 0:04:39.800
<v Speaker 1>in whatever format you like, whether it's digital files or

0:04:39.839 --> 0:04:44.120
<v Speaker 1>physical media, or even like sheet music. You can charge

0:04:44.120 --> 0:04:47.320
<v Speaker 1>whatever you like for your work, though obviously if you

0:04:47.320 --> 0:04:49.839
<v Speaker 1>go bonkers and you ask for a ridiculously high price,

0:04:50.520 --> 0:04:53.240
<v Speaker 1>you aren't likely to get a lot of takers. You

0:04:53.320 --> 0:04:57.159
<v Speaker 1>also have the protection should someone else start making copies

0:04:57.360 --> 0:05:01.080
<v Speaker 1>of your song without your permission. Maybe they are performing

0:05:01.080 --> 0:05:04.960
<v Speaker 1>it themselves, in which case they should secure a license first,

0:05:05.640 --> 0:05:09.680
<v Speaker 1>or maybe they're taking your original recording and just duplicating it.

0:05:10.640 --> 0:05:13.839
<v Speaker 1>So let's say that you created an MP three file

0:05:14.520 --> 0:05:17.120
<v Speaker 1>and they just copy the MP three file endlessly and

0:05:17.720 --> 0:05:20.200
<v Speaker 1>start either giving it away or selling it to people.

0:05:20.760 --> 0:05:25.080
<v Speaker 1>You could sue that person, and in court you could

0:05:25.120 --> 0:05:28.440
<v Speaker 1>prove that you hold the copyright to that piece of music,

0:05:28.680 --> 0:05:32.080
<v Speaker 1>and assuming the court agrees that the copyright is legitimate,

0:05:32.560 --> 0:05:36.680
<v Speaker 1>you could then seek damages against the person or entity

0:05:36.760 --> 0:05:40.920
<v Speaker 1>that made the unauthorized copies of your work. Music is

0:05:40.960 --> 0:05:44.560
<v Speaker 1>actually really a special case because you can have multiple

0:05:44.600 --> 0:05:48.400
<v Speaker 1>copyrights on the work. You could have one for the lyrics,

0:05:48.920 --> 0:05:51.880
<v Speaker 1>then you could have another for the musical composition itself,

0:05:52.360 --> 0:05:55.040
<v Speaker 1>and that would mean that someone who wanted to play

0:05:55.040 --> 0:05:59.520
<v Speaker 1>your music but change the lyrics would still potentially be

0:05:59.600 --> 0:06:02.800
<v Speaker 1>liable for copyright violations. But we're going to get back

0:06:02.800 --> 0:06:05.159
<v Speaker 1>to that a little bit later in this episode, but

0:06:05.200 --> 0:06:07.640
<v Speaker 1>it is something to keep in mind. However, Then there

0:06:07.640 --> 0:06:11.000
<v Speaker 1>are such things as mechanical licenses. This sets out the

0:06:11.080 --> 0:06:16.120
<v Speaker 1>rules for stuff like playing recorded music in particular places.

0:06:16.160 --> 0:06:19.159
<v Speaker 1>So if you've ever been to like a restaurant or

0:06:19.200 --> 0:06:22.560
<v Speaker 1>a theater and you've heard music being played over the

0:06:22.600 --> 0:06:28.479
<v Speaker 1>sound system, chances are that that place of business has

0:06:28.640 --> 0:06:31.920
<v Speaker 1>paid out a license fee in order to be able

0:06:32.000 --> 0:06:36.480
<v Speaker 1>to do that. Intellectual property rights get pretty complicated. Uh.

0:06:36.600 --> 0:06:39.880
<v Speaker 1>It also depends upon the size of the venue. I

0:06:39.960 --> 0:06:41.760
<v Speaker 1>might have to do a future episode to kind of

0:06:41.760 --> 0:06:44.599
<v Speaker 1>talk about all the exceptions, because, as I said, it

0:06:44.680 --> 0:06:47.159
<v Speaker 1>does get complicated, and in some cases, if it's a

0:06:47.240 --> 0:06:51.480
<v Speaker 1>very small venue, UH, they can sometimes be exempt from

0:06:51.520 --> 0:06:53.320
<v Speaker 1>having to pay the same sort of license fees that

0:06:53.440 --> 0:06:56.520
<v Speaker 1>larger venues have to pay. And part of the argument

0:06:56.560 --> 0:06:59.080
<v Speaker 1>there is that the number of people who would actually

0:06:59.080 --> 0:07:02.960
<v Speaker 1>experience the music is much smaller because the venue is

0:07:03.000 --> 0:07:07.440
<v Speaker 1>smaller anyway. In the old days, as in before the

0:07:07.480 --> 0:07:11.840
<v Speaker 1>printing press, copyright wasn't really that big of a thing, like,

0:07:11.880 --> 0:07:15.520
<v Speaker 1>there wasn't a big concern for it. There were predecessors

0:07:15.560 --> 0:07:19.800
<v Speaker 1>for formal copyright, but truthfully, there wasn't much occasion to

0:07:19.880 --> 0:07:23.480
<v Speaker 1>use them because the act of copying a work involved

0:07:23.520 --> 0:07:28.280
<v Speaker 1>actually making a copy out by hand, handwriting the copy

0:07:28.400 --> 0:07:32.200
<v Speaker 1>of a written work. This was a painstaking process and

0:07:32.280 --> 0:07:35.120
<v Speaker 1>not something that could be done on any sort of scale,

0:07:35.600 --> 0:07:38.880
<v Speaker 1>and so copyright wasn't as huge a concern just because

0:07:38.960 --> 0:07:42.080
<v Speaker 1>infringement itself was not something that was easy to do.

0:07:42.720 --> 0:07:44.880
<v Speaker 1>And to that the fact that much of the world's

0:07:44.880 --> 0:07:48.280
<v Speaker 1>population was illiterate and there just wasn't a foundation for

0:07:48.320 --> 0:07:52.040
<v Speaker 1>copyright infringement to really take hold. Then a smarty pants

0:07:52.120 --> 0:07:54.920
<v Speaker 1>named Johann Gutenberg had to go and invent the movable

0:07:54.960 --> 0:07:57.960
<v Speaker 1>type printing press, at least the European version. I should

0:07:58.000 --> 0:08:01.280
<v Speaker 1>stress that Europe because the parts of the world were

0:08:01.280 --> 0:08:04.360
<v Speaker 1>actually further advanced with printing technologies than Europe was. But

0:08:04.440 --> 0:08:07.760
<v Speaker 1>this is the one that Western cultures tend to talk

0:08:07.800 --> 0:08:11.800
<v Speaker 1>about because we get a little myopic. But i'll i'll

0:08:11.840 --> 0:08:14.360
<v Speaker 1>set aside the commentary. So with the printing press, it

0:08:14.400 --> 0:08:18.680
<v Speaker 1>became possible to set the type on the press and

0:08:18.720 --> 0:08:22.240
<v Speaker 1>then print out sheets one after the other in relatively

0:08:22.320 --> 0:08:25.520
<v Speaker 1>quick succession. Now, it still took time to set the

0:08:25.560 --> 0:08:28.200
<v Speaker 1>press between pages because you had to change all the

0:08:28.240 --> 0:08:31.720
<v Speaker 1>type out right. You had to remove all the type,

0:08:32.000 --> 0:08:34.680
<v Speaker 1>set the type again, and then print the next sheet.

0:08:35.480 --> 0:08:38.120
<v Speaker 1>So you would typically use the press to print a

0:08:38.160 --> 0:08:41.559
<v Speaker 1>bunch of the same sheet in a row before you

0:08:41.600 --> 0:08:44.400
<v Speaker 1>would reset the type and move on to the next sheet. However,

0:08:44.440 --> 0:08:47.680
<v Speaker 1>you could also use a single large sheet of paper

0:08:47.880 --> 0:08:51.320
<v Speaker 1>to set up multiple pages of text, and so you

0:08:51.360 --> 0:08:56.319
<v Speaker 1>could divide up the quadrants of a printing press and

0:08:56.440 --> 0:08:59.680
<v Speaker 1>change the type up so that you are actually creating

0:09:00.120 --> 0:09:03.760
<v Speaker 1>multiple pages per press. And then you fold the paper

0:09:03.800 --> 0:09:06.680
<v Speaker 1>in such a way that that makes all sense, like

0:09:06.720 --> 0:09:09.840
<v Speaker 1>if you fold it once along a vertical line, so

0:09:09.920 --> 0:09:14.480
<v Speaker 1>you you fold it in half vertically. Um, then are

0:09:14.520 --> 0:09:17.320
<v Speaker 1>along the vertical access I should say, Then you end

0:09:17.400 --> 0:09:21.280
<v Speaker 1>up with a folio that was a single large sheet

0:09:21.320 --> 0:09:23.840
<v Speaker 1>of paper that would have one page printed on the

0:09:24.080 --> 0:09:27.000
<v Speaker 1>left side, one page printed on the right side. You

0:09:27.040 --> 0:09:29.760
<v Speaker 1>have a vertical fold in the middle, and then you

0:09:29.800 --> 0:09:31.640
<v Speaker 1>can just keep printing those over and over again, and

0:09:31.679 --> 0:09:34.640
<v Speaker 1>then you bind a bunch of those together and you've

0:09:34.679 --> 0:09:39.120
<v Speaker 1>got a book. Or you could do a double fold,

0:09:39.440 --> 0:09:41.800
<v Speaker 1>and you could have a quarto, which would also involve

0:09:41.800 --> 0:09:44.240
<v Speaker 1>you having to make a cut along the horizontal line.

0:09:44.280 --> 0:09:48.120
<v Speaker 1>But then you've got four pages per sheet, so you

0:09:48.160 --> 0:09:50.800
<v Speaker 1>could do that, and that it means that with one

0:09:50.920 --> 0:09:55.800
<v Speaker 1>press you're effectively printing four pages, and then you let

0:09:55.800 --> 0:09:57.240
<v Speaker 1>it dry, you flip it over, and you can print

0:09:57.280 --> 0:10:01.480
<v Speaker 1>another four pages. Very useful. So this was these were

0:10:01.520 --> 0:10:05.680
<v Speaker 1>different ways that you could end up creating books fairly quickly.

0:10:06.320 --> 0:10:09.480
<v Speaker 1>The process of publishing became much faster than with people

0:10:09.640 --> 0:10:12.320
<v Speaker 1>doing it by hand, but there wasn't yet a formalized

0:10:12.320 --> 0:10:16.400
<v Speaker 1>protection in place for the creator of the works, and

0:10:16.440 --> 0:10:19.120
<v Speaker 1>at this point, the typical approach was for an author

0:10:19.200 --> 0:10:22.560
<v Speaker 1>to receive a flat fee for their work, which would

0:10:22.559 --> 0:10:27.360
<v Speaker 1>then go to a book printer to produce, so the

0:10:27.400 --> 0:10:30.760
<v Speaker 1>printer would take ownership of that work from that point forward.

0:10:31.160 --> 0:10:33.080
<v Speaker 1>Then it was just a matter of time before other

0:10:33.080 --> 0:10:35.480
<v Speaker 1>printers would get hold of the book and start making

0:10:35.480 --> 0:10:38.240
<v Speaker 1>their own copies, at least for books that proved to

0:10:38.240 --> 0:10:41.600
<v Speaker 1>be popular for authors. There really wasn't a whole lot

0:10:41.640 --> 0:10:45.400
<v Speaker 1>of profit in this approach. William Shakespeare, who you know,

0:10:45.480 --> 0:10:49.319
<v Speaker 1>you could argue, was one of the greatest English writers,

0:10:50.120 --> 0:10:53.240
<v Speaker 1>mostly known for his plays but also his poetry. He

0:10:53.320 --> 0:10:57.080
<v Speaker 1>never sought out the printing of his plays. Others would

0:10:57.120 --> 0:10:59.440
<v Speaker 1>give it a shot. Either they would try to copy

0:10:59.520 --> 0:11:02.640
<v Speaker 1>down days as they were being performed and then go

0:11:02.720 --> 0:11:06.000
<v Speaker 1>and print what they had transcribed, or they would try

0:11:06.040 --> 0:11:09.000
<v Speaker 1>to get hold of the sides that actors were using

0:11:09.000 --> 0:11:11.440
<v Speaker 1>in their roles, or a combination of the two. It

0:11:11.480 --> 0:11:14.920
<v Speaker 1>was really only after Shakespeare's death that his friends got

0:11:14.960 --> 0:11:18.040
<v Speaker 1>together and did their best to gather his plays and

0:11:18.120 --> 0:11:21.360
<v Speaker 1>publish them. Now, based on what I know about Shakespeare,

0:11:21.640 --> 0:11:24.200
<v Speaker 1>I suspect the reason that he did not seek out

0:11:24.240 --> 0:11:27.520
<v Speaker 1>publication of his works was that it really wasn't where

0:11:27.559 --> 0:11:30.600
<v Speaker 1>the money would be for him. He would get a

0:11:30.640 --> 0:11:34.280
<v Speaker 1>pay the flat fee for every play he wrote, but

0:11:34.360 --> 0:11:38.439
<v Speaker 1>more importantly, he was a part owner of the theater itself.

0:11:38.520 --> 0:11:41.480
<v Speaker 1>Like the Globe Theater or the Rose Theater. He was

0:11:41.559 --> 0:11:44.600
<v Speaker 1>part of the company that owned the theater, so that

0:11:44.640 --> 0:11:48.080
<v Speaker 1>meant he would actually take a share of the box office. So,

0:11:48.120 --> 0:11:51.640
<v Speaker 1>in other words, his main goal was to attract crowds

0:11:51.800 --> 0:11:55.040
<v Speaker 1>to the theater. That's where the money was. But you

0:11:55.080 --> 0:11:57.840
<v Speaker 1>can bet that if there had been serious money in

0:11:57.880 --> 0:12:01.079
<v Speaker 1>publication back in those days, Shakespeare would have been all

0:12:01.120 --> 0:12:02.959
<v Speaker 1>over it because a quick glance at some of the

0:12:03.040 --> 0:12:06.280
<v Speaker 1>lawsuits he was involved with during his lifetime indicates he

0:12:06.360 --> 0:12:10.600
<v Speaker 1>had a certain appreciation for the accumulation of wealth. So Shakespeare,

0:12:10.720 --> 0:12:15.560
<v Speaker 1>great artist, also a business guy, and had publishing been

0:12:15.600 --> 0:12:18.760
<v Speaker 1>a bigger business for the author, he certainly would have

0:12:18.800 --> 0:12:21.440
<v Speaker 1>gone that route, I'm sure of it. Now, the printing

0:12:21.480 --> 0:12:25.440
<v Speaker 1>press was a truly transformational piece of technology. It became

0:12:25.720 --> 0:12:30.160
<v Speaker 1>easier to produce many copies of a work book. Printing businesses,

0:12:30.200 --> 0:12:34.280
<v Speaker 1>which would evolve into true publishing houses, began to pop

0:12:34.360 --> 0:12:37.640
<v Speaker 1>up all over Europe, and the powers that be, that is,

0:12:37.800 --> 0:12:41.400
<v Speaker 1>the Church and the various governments of Europe viewed book

0:12:41.400 --> 0:12:45.560
<v Speaker 1>printers as both an asset and a potential threat. Through

0:12:45.640 --> 0:12:50.160
<v Speaker 1>the printers, these organizations could spread information quickly. The Bible

0:12:50.600 --> 0:12:53.640
<v Speaker 1>was a very early candidate for printing, as the Guttenberg

0:12:53.760 --> 0:12:57.480
<v Speaker 1>Bible proves and governments could use printing presses to spread

0:12:57.520 --> 0:13:01.120
<v Speaker 1>information about laws and declarations and kind of thing. But

0:13:01.280 --> 0:13:04.640
<v Speaker 1>printing presses also meant it was easier to print stuff

0:13:04.679 --> 0:13:08.840
<v Speaker 1>that undermined authority. People who had a boned pick with

0:13:09.120 --> 0:13:12.040
<v Speaker 1>the folks who were in charge could potentially spread their

0:13:12.080 --> 0:13:17.000
<v Speaker 1>ideas and maybe find sympathetic souls who shared those same beliefs.

0:13:17.040 --> 0:13:21.240
<v Speaker 1>So the printing press could enable existential threats to the

0:13:21.280 --> 0:13:24.640
<v Speaker 1>power structure. And this is where we get a predecessor

0:13:24.760 --> 0:13:30.480
<v Speaker 1>to copyright. Now, this predecessor wasn't so much about making

0:13:30.520 --> 0:13:33.960
<v Speaker 1>sure the author of a book was fairly compensated. Instead,

0:13:34.000 --> 0:13:37.520
<v Speaker 1>it was more about keeping printing houses under control. The

0:13:37.559 --> 0:13:41.240
<v Speaker 1>basic idea was that any business that wished to print

0:13:41.360 --> 0:13:45.440
<v Speaker 1>materials had to first secure an official license from, you know,

0:13:45.679 --> 0:13:50.120
<v Speaker 1>the government of that region. These licenses typically meant that

0:13:50.200 --> 0:13:53.240
<v Speaker 1>a specific printer would be responsible for the printing of

0:13:53.520 --> 0:13:57.480
<v Speaker 1>particular works to the exclusion of all other printers. So

0:13:57.600 --> 0:14:00.719
<v Speaker 1>you might say that this one printer can print this

0:14:00.920 --> 0:14:04.559
<v Speaker 1>one book, and no other printer in the region is

0:14:04.600 --> 0:14:07.760
<v Speaker 1>allowed to do that, so they have a monopoly on

0:14:07.800 --> 0:14:11.400
<v Speaker 1>that specific title. In fact, they called the monopolies. These

0:14:11.440 --> 0:14:14.600
<v Speaker 1>agreements would last a set number of years, which wasn't

0:14:14.600 --> 0:14:18.480
<v Speaker 1>too different from the concept of modern copyrights. If any

0:14:18.480 --> 0:14:21.320
<v Speaker 1>other printer was found to produce a work that some

0:14:22.160 --> 0:14:25.600
<v Speaker 1>other printer had exclusive rights to, that matter could go

0:14:25.680 --> 0:14:28.760
<v Speaker 1>to court, but this was all about the printing houses,

0:14:28.920 --> 0:14:33.960
<v Speaker 1>not authors. England passed its first actual copyright law in

0:14:34.080 --> 0:14:38.040
<v Speaker 1>seventeen This law changed things quite a bit. A publisher

0:14:38.080 --> 0:14:40.960
<v Speaker 1>would have a fourteen year period of exclusive rights to

0:14:41.000 --> 0:14:44.840
<v Speaker 1>publish any new book. Existing books that the printing house

0:14:44.920 --> 0:14:48.720
<v Speaker 1>was already printing would enjoy protection for twenty one years.

0:14:49.160 --> 0:14:52.000
<v Speaker 1>After that, the author of the work could choose to

0:14:52.080 --> 0:14:56.040
<v Speaker 1>renew the copyright if the author was still alive. Otherwise

0:14:56.040 --> 0:14:59.920
<v Speaker 1>the work would enter into the public domain, meaning any

0:15:00.080 --> 0:15:02.560
<v Speaker 1>one would be legally allowed to make a copy of

0:15:02.600 --> 0:15:05.320
<v Speaker 1>that work or use it in any way they liked.

0:15:05.720 --> 0:15:09.040
<v Speaker 1>There were no longer any protections on that piece of work,

0:15:09.480 --> 0:15:12.840
<v Speaker 1>and it was available for any public use. The United

0:15:12.880 --> 0:15:16.480
<v Speaker 1>States wouldn't get its first true copyright law until nearly

0:15:16.520 --> 0:15:20.320
<v Speaker 1>a century later, but let's be fair, there was no

0:15:20.400 --> 0:15:22.920
<v Speaker 1>such thing as the United States in seventeen ten, so

0:15:22.960 --> 0:15:26.080
<v Speaker 1>I'm gonna cut the Young Nations some slack here. The

0:15:26.120 --> 0:15:29.479
<v Speaker 1>copyright law of the US followed closely in the footsteps

0:15:29.520 --> 0:15:32.000
<v Speaker 1>of the Copyright Act of Britain, which was also known

0:15:32.040 --> 0:15:36.040
<v Speaker 1>as the Statute of Ann as in Queen Anne. So

0:15:36.080 --> 0:15:38.920
<v Speaker 1>the way that the US law worked was that an

0:15:38.920 --> 0:15:41.680
<v Speaker 1>author would register their work with the U S District

0:15:41.680 --> 0:15:45.720
<v Speaker 1>Court of their particular region, and they would in return

0:15:45.800 --> 0:15:49.000
<v Speaker 1>receive an exclusive copyright for fourteen years, with the option

0:15:49.040 --> 0:15:52.400
<v Speaker 1>to renew for a second fourteen year period, and after

0:15:52.440 --> 0:15:55.920
<v Speaker 1>those twenty eight years, assuming that you actually renewed your copyright,

0:15:56.320 --> 0:15:59.160
<v Speaker 1>the work would then enter into the public domain with

0:15:59.320 --> 0:16:02.680
<v Speaker 1>the Statute of Ann and the Copyright Act of the

0:16:02.760 --> 0:16:05.040
<v Speaker 1>US or at the point where authors would get a

0:16:05.040 --> 0:16:07.720
<v Speaker 1>little more protection and a chance to benefit more from

0:16:07.760 --> 0:16:10.600
<v Speaker 1>their own work. It was no longer the case of

0:16:10.720 --> 0:16:14.280
<v Speaker 1>a one time flat fee in every instance. Now, I

0:16:14.320 --> 0:16:18.480
<v Speaker 1>say authors, but often we're really still talking about publishers. Here,

0:16:18.720 --> 0:16:21.800
<v Speaker 1>the publisher retains the copyright because the copyright allows the

0:16:21.800 --> 0:16:25.800
<v Speaker 1>publisher to you know, publish the works. Otherwise, the author

0:16:25.840 --> 0:16:28.960
<v Speaker 1>would have to grant permission for each printing. You'd have

0:16:29.000 --> 0:16:31.160
<v Speaker 1>to have a license for it. It It all gets clunky

0:16:31.600 --> 0:16:34.720
<v Speaker 1>right that the author has exclusive copyright to their work,

0:16:35.400 --> 0:16:40.040
<v Speaker 1>they have to grant permission to whichever entity is creating

0:16:40.080 --> 0:16:43.440
<v Speaker 1>copies of that work. You often see this reflected today

0:16:43.680 --> 0:16:46.440
<v Speaker 1>in ways that are kind of confusing. When you agree

0:16:46.560 --> 0:16:51.040
<v Speaker 1>to certain platforms, there's language there that seems to suggest

0:16:51.080 --> 0:16:56.400
<v Speaker 1>that anything you post on that platform is that platform's property.

0:16:56.440 --> 0:17:00.280
<v Speaker 1>But usually the reasoning for the language is to make

0:17:00.360 --> 0:17:04.640
<v Speaker 1>sure that the platform has the necessary permission to display

0:17:04.680 --> 0:17:08.160
<v Speaker 1>whatever it is you're posting, because otherwise, every single time

0:17:08.200 --> 0:17:10.600
<v Speaker 1>you posted, you would have to have some sort of

0:17:10.640 --> 0:17:15.280
<v Speaker 1>licensing agreement or something that would give permission to the

0:17:15.320 --> 0:17:18.960
<v Speaker 1>platform to actually display the thing you wrote. It gets

0:17:19.000 --> 0:17:22.240
<v Speaker 1>pretty complicated now. The same would be true for most

0:17:22.320 --> 0:17:25.960
<v Speaker 1>music produced in the modern era. The copyright isn't necessarily

0:17:26.240 --> 0:17:30.560
<v Speaker 1>held by the artist, but by a music label. It's

0:17:30.640 --> 0:17:32.919
<v Speaker 1>kind of like how Thomas Edison made sure that his

0:17:33.040 --> 0:17:36.600
<v Speaker 1>name was on every patent produced out of his business.

0:17:37.040 --> 0:17:38.919
<v Speaker 1>He might not have had a direct hand in the

0:17:38.960 --> 0:17:42.320
<v Speaker 1>creation of every invention. In fact, we know that he

0:17:42.359 --> 0:17:44.400
<v Speaker 1>didn't have a direct hand and a lot of them,

0:17:44.760 --> 0:17:47.720
<v Speaker 1>but he sure as heck made sure that his signature

0:17:47.800 --> 0:17:49.560
<v Speaker 1>was on the patent to every single one, so that

0:17:49.600 --> 0:17:52.760
<v Speaker 1>he had a right to each of them. Anyway. One

0:17:52.800 --> 0:17:55.639
<v Speaker 1>of the consequences of all of this is that to

0:17:55.720 --> 0:17:59.040
<v Speaker 1>this day, getting the permission of an author or artist

0:17:59.440 --> 0:18:04.400
<v Speaker 1>in order to use their work typically isn't enough. That's

0:18:04.440 --> 0:18:08.920
<v Speaker 1>because in many cases that individual creator doesn't actually hold

0:18:09.040 --> 0:18:13.360
<v Speaker 1>the copyright to the work. It's more likely that some

0:18:13.520 --> 0:18:18.280
<v Speaker 1>corporate entity will hold the copyright on behalf of that creator.

0:18:18.680 --> 0:18:21.199
<v Speaker 1>So you really have to get the permission of whatever

0:18:21.320 --> 0:18:25.399
<v Speaker 1>entity holds the copyright for any specific intellectual property. In

0:18:25.400 --> 0:18:28.880
<v Speaker 1>some cases it might be an individual creator, in other

0:18:28.920 --> 0:18:32.720
<v Speaker 1>cases it might be a big company. So let's say

0:18:32.840 --> 0:18:36.560
<v Speaker 1>if you met an artist for Disney in a cafe

0:18:37.160 --> 0:18:39.920
<v Speaker 1>and this artist told you, oh, it's totally cool if

0:18:39.960 --> 0:18:44.399
<v Speaker 1>you use they're drawing of a popular Disney character for

0:18:44.600 --> 0:18:48.639
<v Speaker 1>something you're doing, that's probably not good enough because that

0:18:48.760 --> 0:18:54.119
<v Speaker 1>artist wouldn't even hold the copyright for that work. Disney would,

0:18:54.600 --> 0:18:57.959
<v Speaker 1>and copyright laws would evolve quite a lot over the

0:18:58.000 --> 0:19:02.560
<v Speaker 1>following centuries. They banded to include more types of works,

0:19:03.040 --> 0:19:05.919
<v Speaker 1>as well as to allow for things like licenses, and

0:19:05.960 --> 0:19:08.879
<v Speaker 1>without these considerations, it might be illegal to, you know,

0:19:09.280 --> 0:19:12.399
<v Speaker 1>play playback an album without first getting permission of the

0:19:12.480 --> 0:19:15.679
<v Speaker 1>music label, which is clearly absurd. You wouldn't have it.

0:19:15.760 --> 0:19:19.120
<v Speaker 1>Where you bought an album, you went home, and every

0:19:19.160 --> 0:19:21.320
<v Speaker 1>time you were to play the album, you first had

0:19:21.359 --> 0:19:25.200
<v Speaker 1>to get permission from the music label to do that

0:19:25.200 --> 0:19:27.760
<v Speaker 1>that just doesn't make sense. But that's the sort of

0:19:27.760 --> 0:19:31.400
<v Speaker 1>stuff that actually had to be codified into law. It's

0:19:31.840 --> 0:19:34.800
<v Speaker 1>you know, it's not enough to just everyone agree like,

0:19:34.800 --> 0:19:37.520
<v Speaker 1>oh well, that's absurd. It actually had to be written

0:19:37.560 --> 0:19:41.480
<v Speaker 1>down somewhere and ratified. One of the biggest changes to

0:19:41.520 --> 0:19:46.800
<v Speaker 1>copyright has been how long that copyright protection lasts. This

0:19:46.960 --> 0:19:52.480
<v Speaker 1>also ties into how many capitalist societies treat corporations, which

0:19:52.560 --> 0:19:56.159
<v Speaker 1>is uh ridiculously in my mind. So here in the

0:19:56.240 --> 0:19:59.720
<v Speaker 1>United States in particular, corporations are treated legally like a

0:19:59.760 --> 0:20:02.400
<v Speaker 1>per person. But if you think about that's kind of bonkers.

0:20:03.160 --> 0:20:06.240
<v Speaker 1>More than kind of bonkers, I should say, people get old,

0:20:06.240 --> 0:20:10.640
<v Speaker 1>people pass away corporations. Assuming that they are run well

0:20:10.920 --> 0:20:13.199
<v Speaker 1>and they provide some sort of goods or services that

0:20:13.280 --> 0:20:18.240
<v Speaker 1>people want or need, they can exist indefinitely. And a

0:20:18.280 --> 0:20:23.119
<v Speaker 1>corporation that relies heavily on intellectual property is quite loath

0:20:23.520 --> 0:20:26.760
<v Speaker 1>to give up that meal ticket, and so corporations over

0:20:26.800 --> 0:20:31.480
<v Speaker 1>the years have lobbied hard to extend copyright in order

0:20:31.480 --> 0:20:33.920
<v Speaker 1>to prevent the i P that they own from falling

0:20:34.000 --> 0:20:36.320
<v Speaker 1>into the public domain. And then they can no longer

0:20:37.680 --> 0:20:42.040
<v Speaker 1>exclusively exploit that i P. They could still exploit it.

0:20:42.280 --> 0:20:45.639
<v Speaker 1>They could still sell stuff with it, just it doesn't

0:20:45.640 --> 0:20:48.679
<v Speaker 1>stop anyone else from doing the same thing. Perhaps the

0:20:48.720 --> 0:20:52.000
<v Speaker 1>most high profile of all these companies was one that

0:20:52.080 --> 0:20:55.920
<v Speaker 1>seemed fixated on a particular mouse that I've already mentioned.

0:20:56.520 --> 0:21:07.320
<v Speaker 1>I'll explain more after this quick break. Before the break,

0:21:07.400 --> 0:21:09.960
<v Speaker 1>I t s that corporations played a huge part in

0:21:10.040 --> 0:21:14.040
<v Speaker 1>lobbying Congress to extend the protections of copyright, and one

0:21:14.080 --> 0:21:17.639
<v Speaker 1>of those corporations is the Walt Disney Company and the

0:21:17.680 --> 0:21:22.600
<v Speaker 1>cultural phenomenon that is Mickey Mouse. The cartoon Steamboat Willie,

0:21:22.800 --> 0:21:26.239
<v Speaker 1>which was the first Mickey Mouse cartoon, was released in

0:21:26.359 --> 0:21:31.000
<v Speaker 1>nineteen twenty eight. Now, at that time, US copyright law

0:21:31.119 --> 0:21:34.239
<v Speaker 1>had a twenty eight year protection limit, which could then

0:21:34.280 --> 0:21:37.840
<v Speaker 1>be renewed for a second twenty eight year term, which

0:21:37.840 --> 0:21:41.439
<v Speaker 1>would provide a total of fifty six years of copyright

0:21:41.560 --> 0:21:45.040
<v Speaker 1>exclusivity to the owner of an i P. But then

0:21:45.160 --> 0:21:48.280
<v Speaker 1>the i P would enter the public domain. That means

0:21:48.320 --> 0:21:53.320
<v Speaker 1>that if copyright law had remained unchanged since Steamboat Willie,

0:21:53.680 --> 0:21:56.679
<v Speaker 1>Steamboat Willie would have entered the public domain back in

0:21:57.080 --> 0:22:02.280
<v Speaker 1>nineteen four Spoiler alert. As of the recording of this podcast,

0:22:02.400 --> 0:22:06.199
<v Speaker 1>Steamboat Willie is not in the public domain yet, so

0:22:06.280 --> 0:22:09.879
<v Speaker 1>things did not remain the same. By the nineteen seventies,

0:22:10.040 --> 0:22:13.680
<v Speaker 1>the Disney Company was lobbying hard to change copyright laws,

0:22:13.800 --> 0:22:16.320
<v Speaker 1>and I want to be clear, they weren't the only ones,

0:22:17.040 --> 0:22:22.840
<v Speaker 1>but you frequently hear Disney specifically in regard to lobbying

0:22:22.880 --> 0:22:26.960
<v Speaker 1>for copyright law extensions, and it worked. Congress changed the

0:22:27.000 --> 0:22:30.840
<v Speaker 1>copyright protection so that copyrights that were held by individual

0:22:30.920 --> 0:22:35.840
<v Speaker 1>authors protection would last the lifetime of that author plus

0:22:35.880 --> 0:22:40.359
<v Speaker 1>another fifty years. So now we're well beyond guaranteeing the

0:22:40.480 --> 0:22:42.639
<v Speaker 1>right of a person to profit off of their work.

0:22:42.800 --> 0:22:47.080
<v Speaker 1>Right now, you're saying you're guaranteeing that multiple generations of

0:22:47.119 --> 0:22:50.560
<v Speaker 1>an author's family can continue to benefit from the work

0:22:50.840 --> 0:22:54.760
<v Speaker 1>of the author. The author will be dead and fifty

0:22:54.840 --> 0:22:57.680
<v Speaker 1>years will pass, and until those fifty years are up,

0:22:57.760 --> 0:23:03.680
<v Speaker 1>the estate will continue to benefit monetarily from that author's work,

0:23:03.800 --> 0:23:06.600
<v Speaker 1>assuming that you know people are still buying it. Obviously,

0:23:07.000 --> 0:23:09.480
<v Speaker 1>if it falls out of favor and no one's purchasing anything,

0:23:09.560 --> 0:23:14.800
<v Speaker 1>then those rights, while they're important, don't actually leverage into

0:23:14.800 --> 0:23:18.240
<v Speaker 1>any kind of monetary gain. But this is where I

0:23:18.280 --> 0:23:20.639
<v Speaker 1>start feeling a little weird about all this, because I

0:23:20.640 --> 0:23:23.680
<v Speaker 1>think it's one thing to want to provide for your family, right,

0:23:23.800 --> 0:23:28.560
<v Speaker 1>you want to earn money and help contribute to your

0:23:28.680 --> 0:23:33.200
<v Speaker 1>family or households well being. But it's another to create

0:23:33.359 --> 0:23:36.960
<v Speaker 1>generational wealth that removes the need for future generations to

0:23:37.840 --> 0:23:41.360
<v Speaker 1>you know, make any sort of meaningful contribution themselves. There

0:23:41.359 --> 0:23:45.320
<v Speaker 1>are lots of cases where the children of authors who

0:23:45.320 --> 0:23:50.080
<v Speaker 1>were incredibly successful, uh, have themselves gone on to do

0:23:50.200 --> 0:23:53.600
<v Speaker 1>amazing things, which is great. But there are also cases

0:23:53.640 --> 0:23:57.320
<v Speaker 1>of people who just kind of, you know, never bothered

0:23:57.320 --> 0:24:00.800
<v Speaker 1>to do anything because they didn't really have need to.

0:24:01.160 --> 0:24:03.960
<v Speaker 1>They were all of their needs were already met because

0:24:04.640 --> 0:24:09.000
<v Speaker 1>they were earning income on something that their parents or

0:24:09.080 --> 0:24:13.320
<v Speaker 1>grandparents or great grandparents had done, and there never was

0:24:13.359 --> 0:24:16.920
<v Speaker 1>any need for them to do anything. Uh. Not super

0:24:17.640 --> 0:24:21.760
<v Speaker 1>helpful for the general society. Not very healthy in my

0:24:21.800 --> 0:24:26.440
<v Speaker 1>mind anyway. For corporations that owned i P. It was

0:24:26.480 --> 0:24:29.399
<v Speaker 1>a different story, right, because corporations don't die, so you

0:24:29.440 --> 0:24:32.840
<v Speaker 1>can't say the life of a corporation plus fifty years.

0:24:32.880 --> 0:24:36.920
<v Speaker 1>So in this case, the copyright protection extended the term

0:24:37.119 --> 0:24:40.720
<v Speaker 1>for works that had been published before ninety eight to

0:24:40.840 --> 0:24:44.359
<v Speaker 1>a total term of seventy five years of protection. Uh.

0:24:44.440 --> 0:24:48.119
<v Speaker 1>The Copyright Extension pushed that that protection of Steamboat Willie

0:24:48.200 --> 0:24:50.119
<v Speaker 1>to two thousand three because of that, because it was

0:24:50.160 --> 0:24:53.479
<v Speaker 1>published in nineteen seventy five years later would be up

0:24:53.480 --> 0:24:58.199
<v Speaker 1>to two thousand three. However, in nineteen Congress passed the

0:24:58.240 --> 0:25:02.360
<v Speaker 1>Copyright Term Extension at also known as the Sunny Bono

0:25:02.520 --> 0:25:06.160
<v Speaker 1>Copyright Term Extension Act, after the late congressman and musicians

0:25:06.160 --> 0:25:09.600
<v Speaker 1>Sonny Bono Bono had passed away in an accident while

0:25:09.600 --> 0:25:12.520
<v Speaker 1>Congress was hashing out this extension bill, so he was

0:25:12.640 --> 0:25:17.280
<v Speaker 1>posthumously honored with the title of the the Act. This

0:25:17.359 --> 0:25:20.720
<v Speaker 1>act extended the copyright protection for any work published in

0:25:20.840 --> 0:25:24.720
<v Speaker 1>nineteen twenty three or later. And the extension meant that

0:25:24.760 --> 0:25:28.159
<v Speaker 1>the copyright protection now went from the life of the

0:25:28.200 --> 0:25:31.679
<v Speaker 1>author plus fifty years to the life of the author

0:25:31.720 --> 0:25:34.679
<v Speaker 1>plus seventy years for those works that were created by

0:25:34.760 --> 0:25:39.359
<v Speaker 1>an individual artist. And it meant for works of corporate authorship.

0:25:39.720 --> 0:25:43.399
<v Speaker 1>You know, works that like Steamboat Willie from Disney, they

0:25:43.440 --> 0:25:46.200
<v Speaker 1>went from having seventy five years of protection to either

0:25:46.400 --> 0:25:50.520
<v Speaker 1>ninety five years after publication or one twenty years from

0:25:50.560 --> 0:25:54.080
<v Speaker 1>the date of creation, whichever ended earlier. So you know,

0:25:54.320 --> 0:25:58.720
<v Speaker 1>corporate corporations might create something but not yet publish it,

0:25:59.160 --> 0:26:02.639
<v Speaker 1>So in some cases you would actually have a shorter

0:26:02.760 --> 0:26:05.560
<v Speaker 1>period between time of creation and a hundred twenty years

0:26:05.920 --> 0:26:09.680
<v Speaker 1>than time of publication. In ninety five years anyway, any

0:26:09.800 --> 0:26:12.960
<v Speaker 1>published work before nineteen seventy eight would get an additional

0:26:13.000 --> 0:26:16.720
<v Speaker 1>twenty years of copyright protection, so they went from seventy

0:26:16.720 --> 0:26:19.320
<v Speaker 1>five years to ninety five years, and those extra twenty

0:26:19.400 --> 0:26:22.520
<v Speaker 1>years meant that Steamboat Willie will now enter public domain

0:26:22.720 --> 0:26:26.479
<v Speaker 1>essentially at the beginning of twenty twenty four, unless between

0:26:26.520 --> 0:26:28.920
<v Speaker 1>now and then there's yet another change to copyright law,

0:26:29.119 --> 0:26:34.800
<v Speaker 1>which seems highly unlikely because there is a large opposition

0:26:34.920 --> 0:26:38.000
<v Speaker 1>to that. Since the Copyright Act I've mentioned so far

0:26:38.080 --> 0:26:42.359
<v Speaker 1>retroactively protected any work published after nineteen twenty three, it

0:26:42.400 --> 0:26:45.160
<v Speaker 1>meant that we finally saw some published works go into

0:26:45.160 --> 0:26:49.719
<v Speaker 1>the public domain beginning in twenty nineteen. So on January one,

0:26:50.119 --> 0:26:53.720
<v Speaker 1>twenty nineteen, any copyrighted works that were published in nineteen

0:26:53.720 --> 0:26:56.639
<v Speaker 1>twenty three, with a few exceptions that have to do

0:26:56.680 --> 0:27:00.240
<v Speaker 1>with music because music is complicated, otherwise, they heard the

0:27:00.240 --> 0:27:02.880
<v Speaker 1>public domain at that point. This was the first time

0:27:02.920 --> 0:27:05.600
<v Speaker 1>in twenty one years that a large collection of works

0:27:06.040 --> 0:27:08.840
<v Speaker 1>fell out of copyright protection. And into the public domain

0:27:09.280 --> 0:27:12.600
<v Speaker 1>only because of the timing of changes to copyright law

0:27:12.680 --> 0:27:16.160
<v Speaker 1>in the United States. So works from nineteen twenty two

0:27:16.200 --> 0:27:20.040
<v Speaker 1>had entered the public domain back in nineteen, but then

0:27:20.200 --> 0:27:22.720
<v Speaker 1>you had the change to copyright law, and so any

0:27:22.800 --> 0:27:25.679
<v Speaker 1>works from nineteen twenty three enjoyed twenty more years of

0:27:25.720 --> 0:27:29.080
<v Speaker 1>protection because of that recent extension, and thus they only

0:27:29.160 --> 0:27:32.040
<v Speaker 1>entered the public domain in twenty nineteen. That's the difference

0:27:32.080 --> 0:27:36.400
<v Speaker 1>that a single year can make. This year in one

0:27:36.480 --> 0:27:40.040
<v Speaker 1>we saw works like f Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby

0:27:40.200 --> 0:27:42.639
<v Speaker 1>go into the public domain. You can now make as

0:27:42.680 --> 0:27:45.520
<v Speaker 1>many copies of The Great Gatsby as you like. You

0:27:45.560 --> 0:27:47.560
<v Speaker 1>can hand them out for free. You could charge for

0:27:47.600 --> 0:27:51.440
<v Speaker 1>them if you want to. It's public domain. Dr Doolittle's

0:27:51.520 --> 0:27:54.960
<v Speaker 1>Zoo also went into public domain this year. Agatha Christie's

0:27:55.040 --> 0:27:58.600
<v Speaker 1>The Secret of Chimneys made its exit from copyright protection.

0:27:59.320 --> 0:28:02.560
<v Speaker 1>The nineteen twenty five silent film version of been Her

0:28:02.960 --> 0:28:07.119
<v Speaker 1>not the Charlton Heston version, but the silent film version

0:28:07.160 --> 0:28:10.200
<v Speaker 1>is in public domain, as is Lawn Cheneye The Phantom

0:28:10.240 --> 0:28:13.760
<v Speaker 1>of the Opera. Also the silent film version of Wizard

0:28:13.760 --> 0:28:17.280
<v Speaker 1>of Oz, again not the Big musical version, you know,

0:28:18.119 --> 0:28:21.720
<v Speaker 1>not the follow the Yellow Brick Road version, but the

0:28:21.760 --> 0:28:23.960
<v Speaker 1>silent film version of Wizard of Oz is also in

0:28:24.000 --> 0:28:26.560
<v Speaker 1>the public domain this year. Now, that means that if

0:28:26.560 --> 0:28:28.960
<v Speaker 1>you want to make copies of Lawn Cheney's Phantom of

0:28:28.960 --> 0:28:31.280
<v Speaker 1>the Opera and you want to distribute those widely, if

0:28:31.280 --> 0:28:35.200
<v Speaker 1>you want to post the entire movie on YouTube, you can.

0:28:35.680 --> 0:28:39.960
<v Speaker 1>You can do it for free. You could also, you know,

0:28:40.640 --> 0:28:43.200
<v Speaker 1>sell DVDs of it if you wanted to, you could.

0:28:43.400 --> 0:28:47.160
<v Speaker 1>You could press DVDs with Lawn Cheney's Phantom of the

0:28:47.160 --> 0:28:50.120
<v Speaker 1>Opera and you could sell them. I don't know if

0:28:50.120 --> 0:28:52.560
<v Speaker 1>anyone would buy them, but you could do it. You

0:28:52.600 --> 0:28:54.120
<v Speaker 1>can do it here, you can do it there. You

0:28:54.120 --> 0:28:57.320
<v Speaker 1>can do it everywhere in the US. Anyway, it is

0:28:57.440 --> 0:29:01.440
<v Speaker 1>no longer in copyright. Now, backtracking just a little bit,

0:29:01.720 --> 0:29:04.680
<v Speaker 1>the printing press had made copyright protection more or less

0:29:04.680 --> 0:29:08.080
<v Speaker 1>a necessity to prevent publishers from pouncing on each other

0:29:08.160 --> 0:29:11.920
<v Speaker 1>and flooding the market with copies of various books. But

0:29:12.080 --> 0:29:15.160
<v Speaker 1>for a really long time, copyright was just something that

0:29:15.240 --> 0:29:18.280
<v Speaker 1>big companies were mostly concerned with. It was a non

0:29:18.400 --> 0:29:21.560
<v Speaker 1>factor for the average person. I mean, it affected us,

0:29:21.600 --> 0:29:25.280
<v Speaker 1>but we didn't come into any sort of conflict with

0:29:25.360 --> 0:29:28.760
<v Speaker 1>copyright protection because most of us just didn't have access

0:29:28.800 --> 0:29:32.720
<v Speaker 1>to equipment that we would need to replicate an original work.

0:29:33.360 --> 0:29:36.000
<v Speaker 1>If back in the mid nineteen twenties you managed to

0:29:36.000 --> 0:29:38.360
<v Speaker 1>get your grubby hands on a copy of The Great Gatsby,

0:29:39.080 --> 0:29:42.240
<v Speaker 1>you probably didn't have the ability to copy that work

0:29:42.280 --> 0:29:44.720
<v Speaker 1>and then sell it to two people yourself, you know,

0:29:44.720 --> 0:29:50.920
<v Speaker 1>like undercutting big bookstores or whatever. Publishing houses were protecting themselves,

0:29:51.000 --> 0:29:54.360
<v Speaker 1>but they were doing so mostly from other publishing houses.

0:29:54.760 --> 0:29:57.440
<v Speaker 1>The average person was not a threat. So the nature

0:29:57.440 --> 0:30:02.080
<v Speaker 1>of copyright law was all about corporate entities protecting themselves

0:30:02.080 --> 0:30:06.080
<v Speaker 1>from each other. This, by the way, is what kind

0:30:06.160 --> 0:30:09.600
<v Speaker 1>of becomes an issue in the modern day, where you've

0:30:09.640 --> 0:30:13.200
<v Speaker 1>got the the effect of like a nuclear arsenal, you know,

0:30:13.320 --> 0:30:16.600
<v Speaker 1>corporations against each other that could then be aimed against

0:30:16.600 --> 0:30:22.040
<v Speaker 1>the individual because the nature of copying has changed, so

0:30:22.680 --> 0:30:28.040
<v Speaker 1>there's a disproportionate hardship on the individual because of that.

0:30:28.840 --> 0:30:32.280
<v Speaker 1>So over time, various inventions meant more people would have

0:30:32.320 --> 0:30:36.360
<v Speaker 1>the ability to create copies of stuff, and these technological

0:30:36.440 --> 0:30:40.920
<v Speaker 1>advancements always came hand in hand with media companies freaking

0:30:41.000 --> 0:30:44.120
<v Speaker 1>the heck out about it, which is not an exaggeration.

0:30:44.560 --> 0:30:48.920
<v Speaker 1>The invention of technologies like cassette tapes or VHS tapes,

0:30:49.560 --> 0:30:54.200
<v Speaker 1>burnable compact discs, and of course digital media all sent

0:30:54.520 --> 0:30:59.080
<v Speaker 1>media companies into a tizzy. Each invention prompted the companies

0:30:59.080 --> 0:31:02.800
<v Speaker 1>to object nuous lee and to proclaim that should these

0:31:02.840 --> 0:31:08.000
<v Speaker 1>technologies fall into the hands of the common, unwashed masses

0:31:08.080 --> 0:31:11.840
<v Speaker 1>like myself, that the era of stuff like film or

0:31:11.880 --> 0:31:15.520
<v Speaker 1>television or popular music would all come to an end,

0:31:15.560 --> 0:31:19.320
<v Speaker 1>and the entire industry would crash down on itself, and

0:31:19.920 --> 0:31:23.480
<v Speaker 1>we would then be back to banging rocks together for entertainment.

0:31:24.040 --> 0:31:27.560
<v Speaker 1>News Alert. None of that happened, but in the process

0:31:27.560 --> 0:31:31.560
<v Speaker 1>we saw lots of other laws passed that expanded copyright

0:31:31.600 --> 0:31:36.240
<v Speaker 1>protection by creating a pretty extensive framework for prosecution should

0:31:36.240 --> 0:31:40.040
<v Speaker 1>an IP holder discover that someone has copied or distributed

0:31:40.520 --> 0:31:44.320
<v Speaker 1>stuff that they hold the rights to without proper authorization.

0:31:45.000 --> 0:31:49.120
<v Speaker 1>I will cover more of those in the next episode. Now,

0:31:49.240 --> 0:31:52.840
<v Speaker 1>one of the reasons the public domain is important is

0:31:52.880 --> 0:31:55.479
<v Speaker 1>that works can have a great deal of relevance and

0:31:55.600 --> 0:32:00.400
<v Speaker 1>usefulness many years after they were published. They of all

0:32:00.400 --> 0:32:02.960
<v Speaker 1>the classics that are out there that have stood the

0:32:03.000 --> 0:32:07.560
<v Speaker 1>test of time, But if copyright lasted forever, these works

0:32:07.560 --> 0:32:11.520
<v Speaker 1>would be under a tight restriction in perpetuity. Public domain

0:32:11.560 --> 0:32:16.520
<v Speaker 1>means that eventually these works will become widely accessible. It's

0:32:16.520 --> 0:32:18.920
<v Speaker 1>balancing out the benefits that go to the i P

0:32:19.160 --> 0:32:23.880
<v Speaker 1>holder against the benefits of society as a whole. All right,

0:32:23.960 --> 0:32:28.520
<v Speaker 1>But what about fair use? Okay? So, fair use is

0:32:28.560 --> 0:32:32.360
<v Speaker 1>a concept that allows someone to use part of a

0:32:32.480 --> 0:32:38.960
<v Speaker 1>copyrighted work that uh without permission in one of several ways.

0:32:39.360 --> 0:32:43.840
<v Speaker 1>And it's fairly narrow in its scope, but also kind

0:32:43.840 --> 0:32:46.360
<v Speaker 1>of fuzzy at the edges. So it's narrow and scope,

0:32:46.680 --> 0:32:49.600
<v Speaker 1>but there are no hard yes or no answers to

0:32:49.680 --> 0:32:52.560
<v Speaker 1>this stuff. In general, fair use allows someone to make

0:32:52.720 --> 0:32:56.240
<v Speaker 1>limited use of a portion of a copyrighted work for

0:32:56.320 --> 0:33:02.480
<v Speaker 1>the purposes of news reporting, research, teaching, or criticism and commentary.

0:33:02.840 --> 0:33:06.200
<v Speaker 1>Parody falls into that last category as well, but we're

0:33:06.200 --> 0:33:08.960
<v Speaker 1>gonna come back to that because it's a more specific

0:33:09.440 --> 0:33:14.040
<v Speaker 1>approach than just adding funny words to existing music. Fair

0:33:14.160 --> 0:33:17.160
<v Speaker 1>use means that you don't have to secure permission from

0:33:17.200 --> 0:33:20.520
<v Speaker 1>the copyright holder if you're using a small portion of

0:33:20.560 --> 0:33:24.040
<v Speaker 1>that original work in one of these ways. So, for example,

0:33:24.280 --> 0:33:27.680
<v Speaker 1>if I were criticizing a film, I could use small

0:33:27.720 --> 0:33:30.960
<v Speaker 1>clips of that film during my critique. Let's say I'm

0:33:31.000 --> 0:33:34.080
<v Speaker 1>uploading a video to YouTube where I am critiquing a movie.

0:33:34.520 --> 0:33:37.280
<v Speaker 1>I can include tiny clips of that film in order

0:33:37.320 --> 0:33:41.240
<v Speaker 1>to illustrate specific points of my criticism, and I wouldn't

0:33:41.280 --> 0:33:45.160
<v Speaker 1>have to get permission first. The clips I used would

0:33:45.320 --> 0:33:49.280
<v Speaker 1>need to relate directly to that criticism. However, I might

0:33:49.360 --> 0:33:52.719
<v Speaker 1>want to talk about lighting composition, and I'll use clips

0:33:52.800 --> 0:33:57.400
<v Speaker 1>from Robert Egger's film The Lighthouse, because that film had

0:33:57.480 --> 0:34:00.640
<v Speaker 1>phenomenal lighting in it. So I'd use the examples to

0:34:00.640 --> 0:34:04.600
<v Speaker 1>talk about specific lighting techniques and how they shape storytelling

0:34:04.640 --> 0:34:09.360
<v Speaker 1>and what significance they play in the unfolding of the

0:34:09.400 --> 0:34:11.839
<v Speaker 1>story of the Lighthouse. But if I were to get

0:34:11.840 --> 0:34:15.000
<v Speaker 1>more loosey goosey, my protection of fair use would not

0:34:15.280 --> 0:34:19.319
<v Speaker 1>be as solid. Similarly, if I were to use very

0:34:19.400 --> 0:34:22.880
<v Speaker 1>short clips of the film in my critique, my argument

0:34:22.880 --> 0:34:26.040
<v Speaker 1>of fair use is better supported than if I were to, say,

0:34:26.080 --> 0:34:30.080
<v Speaker 1>include thirty minutes of the movie surrounded by like five

0:34:30.120 --> 0:34:33.640
<v Speaker 1>minutes of criticism. Now, does that mean there's a specific

0:34:33.760 --> 0:34:36.759
<v Speaker 1>safe amount of copyrighted material that you can use without

0:34:36.800 --> 0:34:41.920
<v Speaker 1>fear of retribution? No, there is a common misconception that

0:34:42.000 --> 0:34:45.560
<v Speaker 1>if you use less than say, fifteen seconds of audio

0:34:45.880 --> 0:34:50.000
<v Speaker 1>from a source or six seconds or whatever, that that's

0:34:50.040 --> 0:34:52.080
<v Speaker 1>small enough to be fair use and no one's going

0:34:52.120 --> 0:34:55.040
<v Speaker 1>to come after you. That is just not true. Or rather,

0:34:55.080 --> 0:34:58.440
<v Speaker 1>it's it's not a guarantee. Specifically, it's not a guarantee

0:34:58.480 --> 0:35:02.000
<v Speaker 1>if you're not using that as some form of commentary

0:35:02.120 --> 0:35:05.520
<v Speaker 1>or criticism on the work itself. If you're using it

0:35:05.560 --> 0:35:09.719
<v Speaker 1>as like the button to a moment, you know, like

0:35:09.880 --> 0:35:14.160
<v Speaker 1>a sound bite or whatever, there's very little support for

0:35:14.200 --> 0:35:16.560
<v Speaker 1>a fair use argument there. So if I just filled

0:35:16.600 --> 0:35:21.200
<v Speaker 1>up this podcast with sound bites from various films and music,

0:35:21.400 --> 0:35:24.920
<v Speaker 1>TV shows and radio spots and stuff like that without

0:35:25.200 --> 0:35:28.560
<v Speaker 1>paying a license for all of those things, I would

0:35:28.560 --> 0:35:32.440
<v Speaker 1>be flying pretty darn close to the sun. Because unless

0:35:32.520 --> 0:35:36.680
<v Speaker 1>I'm using those snippets in very specific ways, such as

0:35:36.719 --> 0:35:40.440
<v Speaker 1>to criticize those original works that the snippets belong to,

0:35:41.120 --> 0:35:44.720
<v Speaker 1>or to report on the news of those snippets, well

0:35:44.760 --> 0:35:48.719
<v Speaker 1>I would be infringing on copyright. That doesn't necessarily mean

0:35:48.760 --> 0:35:51.840
<v Speaker 1>anyone is going to come after me. I mean, chances

0:35:51.880 --> 0:35:55.720
<v Speaker 1>are for really small stuff, I'd probably be okay unless

0:35:55.800 --> 0:35:59.399
<v Speaker 1>my podcast got wildly successful, in which case I could

0:35:59.440 --> 0:36:03.160
<v Speaker 1>represent a pretty lucrative target. If the copyright holders looked

0:36:03.200 --> 0:36:06.240
<v Speaker 1>at my podcast and said, well, that show is making

0:36:06.560 --> 0:36:10.640
<v Speaker 1>x million dollars a year, and a lot of that popularity,

0:36:10.800 --> 0:36:14.880
<v Speaker 1>we could argue comes from its use of our intellectual property.

0:36:15.080 --> 0:36:17.719
<v Speaker 1>We can get a piece of that that pie like that.

0:36:17.719 --> 0:36:20.480
<v Speaker 1>That would be the thought process, and it could actually

0:36:20.560 --> 0:36:24.319
<v Speaker 1>work in court. So it doesn't mean on bulletproof if

0:36:24.360 --> 0:36:28.040
<v Speaker 1>I'm just using tiny little clips. It's not until it

0:36:28.080 --> 0:36:31.000
<v Speaker 1>goes to court that I really know if I'm going

0:36:31.040 --> 0:36:33.920
<v Speaker 1>to have to pay or not. So fair use isn't

0:36:33.960 --> 0:36:37.080
<v Speaker 1>a concept that has hard borders to it. It's all

0:36:37.239 --> 0:36:40.440
<v Speaker 1>interpretive stuff. And here's the key to all of it.

0:36:40.719 --> 0:36:44.279
<v Speaker 1>Fair use is something that gets determined in court. So,

0:36:44.320 --> 0:36:48.239
<v Speaker 1>in other words, you can't really use fair use proactively

0:36:48.280 --> 0:36:51.439
<v Speaker 1>as a defense. It's a defense that you make if

0:36:51.520 --> 0:36:55.560
<v Speaker 1>a copyright holder pursues a claim against you for copyright infringement.

0:36:56.160 --> 0:36:58.440
<v Speaker 1>So let's say that I did that critique of the

0:36:58.560 --> 0:37:03.000
<v Speaker 1>Lighthouse and Film Company A twenty four, which released and

0:37:03.040 --> 0:37:05.920
<v Speaker 1>distributed the film here in the United States. Let's say

0:37:05.920 --> 0:37:09.759
<v Speaker 1>that that that company came after me for copyright infringement,

0:37:10.040 --> 0:37:13.320
<v Speaker 1>and I would have to defend my use of those

0:37:13.360 --> 0:37:16.040
<v Speaker 1>clips in court, and I would have to cite fair

0:37:16.160 --> 0:37:19.880
<v Speaker 1>use in that process roout the court proceedings, I would

0:37:19.920 --> 0:37:22.520
<v Speaker 1>likely have to prove that the way I use those

0:37:22.560 --> 0:37:25.640
<v Speaker 1>clips was in fact to critique the film, and that

0:37:25.719 --> 0:37:29.160
<v Speaker 1>the excerpts I used were appropriate and constituted a relatively

0:37:29.239 --> 0:37:33.520
<v Speaker 1>small percentage of the overall critique and a very small

0:37:33.560 --> 0:37:37.640
<v Speaker 1>percentage of the original film. Courts decide on a case

0:37:37.680 --> 0:37:41.040
<v Speaker 1>by case basis if a particular instance is fair use

0:37:41.239 --> 0:37:45.560
<v Speaker 1>or not. There isn't a blanket fair use defense. You

0:37:45.680 --> 0:37:47.319
<v Speaker 1>gotta go in front of the courts to do it.

0:37:47.400 --> 0:37:49.840
<v Speaker 1>And this is what I meant by that nuclear arsenal.

0:37:50.239 --> 0:37:53.560
<v Speaker 1>When it comes to companies versus companies, typically you have

0:37:53.760 --> 0:37:58.719
<v Speaker 1>lawyers on both sides who are just perpetually employed by

0:37:58.760 --> 0:38:02.120
<v Speaker 1>these companies call each other up and they work things out,

0:38:02.280 --> 0:38:04.879
<v Speaker 1>and you might have a licensing agreement, or you might

0:38:05.160 --> 0:38:08.360
<v Speaker 1>agree to a settlement, but it rarely goes to court.

0:38:09.280 --> 0:38:12.440
<v Speaker 1>When it comes to individuals, most of us don't have

0:38:12.600 --> 0:38:16.920
<v Speaker 1>access to that kind of legal defense. So for us,

0:38:17.239 --> 0:38:21.840
<v Speaker 1>it's like a massive, well funded company with high paid

0:38:21.960 --> 0:38:25.799
<v Speaker 1>lawyers versus the little guy, and it means that the

0:38:25.840 --> 0:38:28.560
<v Speaker 1>little guy has to shell out the big bucks in

0:38:28.680 --> 0:38:32.600
<v Speaker 1>order to defend themselves against the corporations, even if the

0:38:32.640 --> 0:38:36.919
<v Speaker 1>little guy is totally in the right. If the the

0:38:37.120 --> 0:38:41.319
<v Speaker 1>use is inarguably fair use, you don't get to that

0:38:41.360 --> 0:38:43.680
<v Speaker 1>decision magically. You have to go to court for it,

0:38:43.719 --> 0:38:48.200
<v Speaker 1>and court is expensive. We're going to pause the conversation

0:38:48.320 --> 0:38:51.200
<v Speaker 1>right here, take a quick break, and we'll be right

0:38:51.239 --> 0:39:01.680
<v Speaker 1>back now. The courts tend to look at four factors

0:39:02.000 --> 0:39:06.480
<v Speaker 1>when deciding if any given instance constitutes fair use. One

0:39:06.600 --> 0:39:09.719
<v Speaker 1>is the purpose and character of the use of the

0:39:09.719 --> 0:39:14.360
<v Speaker 1>original material, including whether the use is for a commercial

0:39:14.480 --> 0:39:18.280
<v Speaker 1>nature or is nonprofit and educational. So, in other words,

0:39:18.560 --> 0:39:21.480
<v Speaker 1>if I'm making videos where I critique films, and I

0:39:21.520 --> 0:39:24.799
<v Speaker 1>include clips of those films and the videos, and I'm

0:39:24.880 --> 0:39:29.239
<v Speaker 1>monetizing those critique videos, that can be a little bit

0:39:29.239 --> 0:39:32.360
<v Speaker 1>of a strike against me because I'm using someone else's

0:39:32.360 --> 0:39:36.200
<v Speaker 1>work in something on my own in order to make money.

0:39:36.480 --> 0:39:39.440
<v Speaker 1>That's not a failure rail the gate, but it does

0:39:39.520 --> 0:39:42.560
<v Speaker 1>make my argument harder. So it doesn't mean that a

0:39:42.640 --> 0:39:46.839
<v Speaker 1>court is going to decide I'm not engaging in fair use.

0:39:47.080 --> 0:39:51.239
<v Speaker 1>But in general, if the use is nonprofit and it's educational,

0:39:51.520 --> 0:39:54.080
<v Speaker 1>it fits more easily into the fair use category, and

0:39:54.200 --> 0:39:57.279
<v Speaker 1>courts tend to be a bit more forgiving. Then there's

0:39:57.320 --> 0:40:01.040
<v Speaker 1>the nature of the copyrighted work itself. In general, it

0:40:01.200 --> 0:40:03.640
<v Speaker 1>is easier to make a fair use argument if the

0:40:03.680 --> 0:40:07.680
<v Speaker 1>thing you're sampling from is a non fictional work. Works

0:40:07.719 --> 0:40:11.600
<v Speaker 1>that are about creative expression, like novels or movies, have

0:40:11.680 --> 0:40:16.120
<v Speaker 1>a higher burden of proof than works that are nonfiction. So,

0:40:16.200 --> 0:40:19.880
<v Speaker 1>for example, in this podcast, I will sometimes quote specific

0:40:19.920 --> 0:40:23.960
<v Speaker 1>sources those are non fiction sources, and I quote from

0:40:24.000 --> 0:40:28.240
<v Speaker 1>them to establish facts. That's easier to defend as fair

0:40:28.400 --> 0:40:32.200
<v Speaker 1>use than if I were to include, say a minute

0:40:32.200 --> 0:40:35.440
<v Speaker 1>long audio clip from a science fiction television show that's

0:40:35.480 --> 0:40:38.400
<v Speaker 1>a work of fiction. It's a work of creative endeavors.

0:40:38.920 --> 0:40:41.520
<v Speaker 1>That is harder to justify as fair use unless I'm

0:40:41.560 --> 0:40:47.000
<v Speaker 1>specifically critiquing the show itself. Then comes the amount and

0:40:47.080 --> 0:40:50.719
<v Speaker 1>substantiality of the portion of the copyrighted work that I

0:40:50.880 --> 0:40:53.840
<v Speaker 1>used in my critique of the Lighthouse. If I'm using

0:40:54.000 --> 0:40:57.480
<v Speaker 1>very short clips that just show up in my video

0:40:57.480 --> 0:40:59.680
<v Speaker 1>for like five or ten seconds each as I talk

0:40:59.719 --> 0:41:03.279
<v Speaker 1>about lighting techniques, that's easier to defend a fair use.

0:41:03.360 --> 0:41:06.080
<v Speaker 1>I'm not showing a significant part of the movie. People

0:41:06.120 --> 0:41:08.480
<v Speaker 1>aren't going to feel like they saw the entire film

0:41:08.520 --> 0:41:12.239
<v Speaker 1>by watching my critique. They're just getting a flavor of

0:41:12.280 --> 0:41:15.000
<v Speaker 1>what I'm talking about and getting an understanding of what

0:41:15.040 --> 0:41:18.920
<v Speaker 1>I mean when I'm critiquing the use of lighting. If I'm, however,

0:41:19.040 --> 0:41:23.560
<v Speaker 1>using very long stretches of the original film, particularly stretches

0:41:23.640 --> 0:41:26.759
<v Speaker 1>that don't include changes in lighting, well that's going to

0:41:26.840 --> 0:41:30.799
<v Speaker 1>be a lot harder to defend in court. And then

0:41:31.320 --> 0:41:34.760
<v Speaker 1>there's the effect of the use upon the potential market

0:41:35.000 --> 0:41:39.080
<v Speaker 1>for the copyrighted work. If my derivative work could possibly

0:41:39.200 --> 0:41:43.120
<v Speaker 1>hurt the sales of the original by displacing the sales

0:41:43.200 --> 0:41:47.160
<v Speaker 1>of that original, that's a problem. And this one is

0:41:47.160 --> 0:41:50.239
<v Speaker 1>a tricky one, right because what if I'm not critiquing

0:41:50.440 --> 0:41:54.520
<v Speaker 1>the technique of a film, but the quality of a film.

0:41:54.560 --> 0:41:56.799
<v Speaker 1>And what if I present a video where I do

0:41:56.840 --> 0:42:00.840
<v Speaker 1>an extensive tear down of a movie and I explain

0:42:00.920 --> 0:42:03.640
<v Speaker 1>how I think it is not a good film, or

0:42:03.680 --> 0:42:06.680
<v Speaker 1>I'm arguing that people shouldn't go see that movie, that

0:42:06.760 --> 0:42:09.360
<v Speaker 1>it would be a waste of their time and money. Well,

0:42:09.440 --> 0:42:12.800
<v Speaker 1>if folks value my judgment, I could well be said

0:42:12.840 --> 0:42:15.359
<v Speaker 1>to have a negative impact on the sales of the

0:42:15.360 --> 0:42:20.120
<v Speaker 1>original work. However, generally that would still be protected. However,

0:42:20.360 --> 0:42:22.560
<v Speaker 1>if I were to use the original in some way

0:42:22.680 --> 0:42:25.320
<v Speaker 1>that would make people want to buy my derivative work

0:42:25.880 --> 0:42:30.120
<v Speaker 1>or consume it for free or whatever instead of the original,

0:42:30.600 --> 0:42:33.040
<v Speaker 1>well that's harder to defend. So let's say, like in

0:42:33.080 --> 0:42:35.800
<v Speaker 1>my critique of The Lighthouse, I included the entire film

0:42:35.840 --> 0:42:39.440
<v Speaker 1>of The Lighthouse in my critique. That would be very

0:42:39.480 --> 0:42:42.239
<v Speaker 1>hard to defend, not just because I'm using a substantial

0:42:42.280 --> 0:42:47.000
<v Speaker 1>amount of the original work, but also the company could argue, hey,

0:42:47.040 --> 0:42:50.319
<v Speaker 1>why would people pay to see our movie if they

0:42:50.320 --> 0:42:53.200
<v Speaker 1>can see it for free. Just wrapped up in the

0:42:53.280 --> 0:42:57.480
<v Speaker 1>context of this supposed criticism video, the copyright holder it

0:42:57.480 --> 0:43:00.720
<v Speaker 1>can make a valid claim that my derivative work would

0:43:00.760 --> 0:43:04.400
<v Speaker 1>not exist without the copyrighted original piece, and yet it

0:43:04.480 --> 0:43:08.480
<v Speaker 1>was essentially siphoning sales away from that original piece that

0:43:08.719 --> 0:43:14.120
<v Speaker 1>is not protected under fair use. Okay, we've got that

0:43:14.160 --> 0:43:16.560
<v Speaker 1>all established. We're gonna make a couple more points before

0:43:16.600 --> 0:43:20.680
<v Speaker 1>we wrap this up. Um, So, when it comes to

0:43:20.719 --> 0:43:23.719
<v Speaker 1>stuff like music, I mentioned that you can copyright the

0:43:23.800 --> 0:43:28.200
<v Speaker 1>musical composition and you can copyright the lyrics separately. One

0:43:28.280 --> 0:43:32.720
<v Speaker 1>other thing you can do, however, is copyright individual performances

0:43:32.800 --> 0:43:36.120
<v Speaker 1>of a piece of music. So, for example, let's say

0:43:36.280 --> 0:43:38.359
<v Speaker 1>that you're making a video and you want to make

0:43:38.480 --> 0:43:42.080
<v Speaker 1>use of a recording of Beethoven's Ode to Joy. Now

0:43:42.320 --> 0:43:45.880
<v Speaker 1>to Joy is part of Beethoven's Symphony number nine. Beethoven

0:43:45.960 --> 0:43:48.960
<v Speaker 1>composed that in the eighteen twenties, and it has long

0:43:49.040 --> 0:43:52.759
<v Speaker 1>since passed into the public domain. You can use Ode

0:43:52.800 --> 0:43:57.000
<v Speaker 1>to Joy in anything you like for free. There's no

0:43:57.040 --> 0:43:59.960
<v Speaker 1>one to pay royalties to as far as that's can

0:44:00.040 --> 0:44:04.840
<v Speaker 1>cern or licensing fees. Two. However, that just covers the

0:44:04.920 --> 0:44:08.960
<v Speaker 1>music itself. A performance of Oh to Joy will have

0:44:09.080 --> 0:44:13.320
<v Speaker 1>its own copyright, which dates to the recording of that piece.

0:44:13.880 --> 0:44:17.560
<v Speaker 1>So even though the music is in public domain, a

0:44:17.600 --> 0:44:21.560
<v Speaker 1>performance likely is not. Unless you're using a performance of

0:44:21.560 --> 0:44:24.759
<v Speaker 1>Oh to Joy. The dates from before the nineteen twenties,

0:44:25.200 --> 0:44:29.440
<v Speaker 1>So you could perform to Joy yourself in your project,

0:44:29.840 --> 0:44:31.880
<v Speaker 1>you'd be good to go. The music is in the

0:44:31.880 --> 0:44:36.160
<v Speaker 1>public domain, the performance is yours, you're fine. But if

0:44:36.160 --> 0:44:39.720
<v Speaker 1>you wanted to, say, use a recording of the London

0:44:39.760 --> 0:44:44.120
<v Speaker 1>Philharmonic's performance that they did sometime in the nineteen nineties

0:44:44.160 --> 0:44:46.440
<v Speaker 1>of oh joy, Well, then you would have to deal

0:44:46.480 --> 0:44:49.239
<v Speaker 1>with some licensing arrangements to get the proper permissions to

0:44:49.280 --> 0:44:52.640
<v Speaker 1>make use of that music, because while the musics in

0:44:52.640 --> 0:44:56.480
<v Speaker 1>the public domain, the performance is not. Then there are

0:44:56.480 --> 0:44:58.880
<v Speaker 1>other things to consider as well. So remember when I

0:44:58.920 --> 0:45:02.200
<v Speaker 1>said parody is kind of a special case with fair use,

0:45:03.320 --> 0:45:06.839
<v Speaker 1>This one gets even more complicated than other forms. So

0:45:07.040 --> 0:45:11.399
<v Speaker 1>technically parody falls under fair use if it falls under

0:45:11.440 --> 0:45:16.040
<v Speaker 1>the criticism and comment consideration for fair use. A typical

0:45:16.080 --> 0:45:19.840
<v Speaker 1>definition of parody is quote and imitation of the style

0:45:19.960 --> 0:45:24.760
<v Speaker 1>of a particular writer, artist, or genre would deliberate exaggeration

0:45:24.840 --> 0:45:29.279
<v Speaker 1>for comic effect end quote, but that doesn't automatically mean

0:45:29.280 --> 0:45:31.359
<v Speaker 1>that it's fair use. For it to be fair use,

0:45:32.000 --> 0:45:36.520
<v Speaker 1>that specific parody really needs to comment upon or criticize

0:45:36.960 --> 0:45:41.000
<v Speaker 1>the original work that it is parodying. For that reason,

0:45:41.280 --> 0:45:45.240
<v Speaker 1>some but not all, of weird Al Yankovic's parody songs

0:45:45.760 --> 0:45:50.040
<v Speaker 1>would easily fall under fair use, and others would be questionable. Now.

0:45:50.080 --> 0:45:52.960
<v Speaker 1>I mentioned weird Al because he's the most famous parody

0:45:53.040 --> 0:45:55.279
<v Speaker 1>artist I can think of, that probably the one that

0:45:55.320 --> 0:45:58.200
<v Speaker 1>most people have heard of, and some of his parodies

0:45:58.480 --> 0:46:02.319
<v Speaker 1>do tend to target the original work, so Smells Like

0:46:02.400 --> 0:46:05.640
<v Speaker 1>Nirvana is a parody of the Nirvana song Smells Like

0:46:05.719 --> 0:46:09.240
<v Speaker 1>Teen Spirit, and it's all about critiquing the original song.

0:46:10.040 --> 0:46:12.840
<v Speaker 1>There are lyrics of what is this song all about?

0:46:13.040 --> 0:46:16.520
<v Speaker 1>Can't figure any lyrics out that comments on the lyrics

0:46:16.520 --> 0:46:19.480
<v Speaker 1>of the original work. Other verses poke fun at Kurt

0:46:19.520 --> 0:46:23.239
<v Speaker 1>Cobain's slurring and mumbling of words, making it hard to

0:46:23.280 --> 0:46:26.360
<v Speaker 1>understand what is actually being sung, So that song parody

0:46:26.520 --> 0:46:30.600
<v Speaker 1>would probably hold up under fair use. But then take

0:46:30.640 --> 0:46:35.080
<v Speaker 1>a song like Foil. Foil is a parody of Lord's

0:46:35.280 --> 0:46:39.680
<v Speaker 1>song Royals, so it's using the music and lyrical structure

0:46:39.920 --> 0:46:42.800
<v Speaker 1>of Royals. You know, they change the actual lyrics, but

0:46:42.840 --> 0:46:46.640
<v Speaker 1>it's the same rhyme, scheme and scanshion of Royals. But

0:46:46.719 --> 0:46:51.919
<v Speaker 1>the song Foil isn't a commentary on Royals. Instead, it's

0:46:51.920 --> 0:46:54.879
<v Speaker 1>a comedic song about aluminum foil. And I'm pretty sure

0:46:54.880 --> 0:46:58.040
<v Speaker 1>you couldn't make an argument that it's somehow commenting on

0:46:58.120 --> 0:47:01.400
<v Speaker 1>the original work, which means that would be harder to

0:47:01.440 --> 0:47:03.920
<v Speaker 1>defend as fair use. It's not a bad song, by

0:47:03.920 --> 0:47:07.120
<v Speaker 1>the way. This isn't a commentary on the quality of

0:47:07.160 --> 0:47:10.279
<v Speaker 1>the parody, but rather whether it would fall under the

0:47:10.280 --> 0:47:13.360
<v Speaker 1>consideration of fair use or not. Now, to be clear,

0:47:13.800 --> 0:47:16.120
<v Speaker 1>weird Al makes it a practice to get permission to

0:47:16.160 --> 0:47:20.600
<v Speaker 1>do his parodies before he does them. He licenses the songs.

0:47:20.960 --> 0:47:24.600
<v Speaker 1>In cases like smells like Nirvana, he might have been

0:47:24.640 --> 0:47:28.680
<v Speaker 1>able to skip that step, or more likely his music

0:47:28.760 --> 0:47:31.920
<v Speaker 1>label would have if they were, you know, willing to

0:47:31.960 --> 0:47:34.960
<v Speaker 1>defend any lawsuits that came their way as a result,

0:47:35.440 --> 0:47:38.720
<v Speaker 1>But as both a courtesy and kind of the necessity,

0:47:38.800 --> 0:47:43.560
<v Speaker 1>he reaches out before recording parodies. Usually, um, there's at

0:47:43.600 --> 0:47:45.960
<v Speaker 1>least one version of this where things didn't work out,

0:47:46.000 --> 0:47:47.719
<v Speaker 1>though actually there's a couple I can think of, but

0:47:47.760 --> 0:47:50.560
<v Speaker 1>I'm gonna mention one in particular. So back in two

0:47:50.560 --> 0:47:53.600
<v Speaker 1>thousand six, weird Al Yankovic was working on an album

0:47:53.640 --> 0:47:56.120
<v Speaker 1>and he wanted to include a parody of the James

0:47:56.120 --> 0:48:01.000
<v Speaker 1>Blunt song You're Beautiful. Yankovic's version is a parody called

0:48:01.200 --> 0:48:05.000
<v Speaker 1>You're Pitiful about a middle aged dude who's seriously down

0:48:05.000 --> 0:48:08.520
<v Speaker 1>on his luck. Blunt was receptive and he gave the

0:48:08.680 --> 0:48:13.560
<v Speaker 1>go ahead to Yankovic, But as Yankovic's album neared publication,

0:48:13.880 --> 0:48:18.080
<v Speaker 1>Blunt's record label, Atlantic Records, reached out to Yankovic's label

0:48:18.239 --> 0:48:21.840
<v Speaker 1>and demanded that the song not appear on the album,

0:48:21.880 --> 0:48:24.960
<v Speaker 1>and you know, music labels typically hold the i P

0:48:25.719 --> 0:48:29.680
<v Speaker 1>for the actual songs of an artist. In this case

0:48:29.880 --> 0:48:33.280
<v Speaker 1>is a little more complicated than that. So getting permission

0:48:33.320 --> 0:48:37.480
<v Speaker 1>from Blunt, while a good thing, wasn't totally legally binding.

0:48:38.280 --> 0:48:42.239
<v Speaker 1>Blunt probably could have pushed back on Atlantic Records about this,

0:48:43.000 --> 0:48:44.960
<v Speaker 1>but that's not exactly an easy thing to do when

0:48:44.960 --> 0:48:46.839
<v Speaker 1>you're an artist. I mean, you you want to work

0:48:46.840 --> 0:48:48.960
<v Speaker 1>with your label. You don't want that to be a

0:48:49.040 --> 0:48:55.200
<v Speaker 1>confrontational relationship. And as I mentioned earlier, defending fair use

0:48:55.520 --> 0:48:58.840
<v Speaker 1>is expensive because it all goes to that consideration of

0:48:58.840 --> 0:49:01.880
<v Speaker 1>a court, and that means lawyers and lawyers have fees,

0:49:02.520 --> 0:49:05.240
<v Speaker 1>and so defending an instance as fair use in court

0:49:05.760 --> 0:49:09.759
<v Speaker 1>can mean that you're paying thousands or tens of thousands

0:49:09.840 --> 0:49:14.400
<v Speaker 1>of dollars in fees just to defend yourself. There's a

0:49:14.440 --> 0:49:19.560
<v Speaker 1>financial disincentive to the average person because again, these laws

0:49:19.920 --> 0:49:23.680
<v Speaker 1>were made with corporations in mind, big entities that can

0:49:23.719 --> 0:49:27.080
<v Speaker 1>afford these kind of things. The average person can't. So

0:49:27.160 --> 0:49:31.280
<v Speaker 1>corporations like music labels or publishers have you know, entire

0:49:31.400 --> 0:49:33.880
<v Speaker 1>teams of lawyers who do this stuff all the time,

0:49:34.160 --> 0:49:37.000
<v Speaker 1>they can put pressure on folks with threats of lawsuits,

0:49:37.320 --> 0:49:39.759
<v Speaker 1>and even if those folks are in the right, you know,

0:49:39.840 --> 0:49:43.520
<v Speaker 1>even if their works clearly would fall under fair use,

0:49:43.920 --> 0:49:47.480
<v Speaker 1>to defend it in court could be way too expensive

0:49:47.760 --> 0:49:50.760
<v Speaker 1>for these individuals to afford it. There have been cases

0:49:50.760 --> 0:49:54.000
<v Speaker 1>in which people have settled out of court for thousands

0:49:54.080 --> 0:49:56.960
<v Speaker 1>of dollars, not because they felt they were legit and

0:49:57.000 --> 0:49:59.600
<v Speaker 1>the wrong, but because trying to prove that they were

0:49:59.640 --> 0:50:03.279
<v Speaker 1>in a of infringement was more expensive than settling. It's

0:50:03.320 --> 0:50:07.040
<v Speaker 1>pretty darn brutal. Now, what about all those posts and

0:50:07.080 --> 0:50:10.759
<v Speaker 1>YouTube videos that say no copyright infringement intended? Those are

0:50:10.760 --> 0:50:14.040
<v Speaker 1>pretty much worthless. It's akin to posting on Facebook that

0:50:14.120 --> 0:50:16.879
<v Speaker 1>you aren't giving Facebook the rights to your data. That's

0:50:16.920 --> 0:50:19.799
<v Speaker 1>also useless because just by signing on to Facebook and

0:50:19.840 --> 0:50:22.680
<v Speaker 1>making an account, you have to agree to Facebook's terms

0:50:22.680 --> 0:50:25.799
<v Speaker 1>of service. That kind of supersedes your little post that

0:50:25.840 --> 0:50:28.400
<v Speaker 1>says you're not in favor of Facebook using your data.

0:50:28.640 --> 0:50:32.279
<v Speaker 1>Facebook's responses, too bad, because you agreed to it by

0:50:32.320 --> 0:50:35.120
<v Speaker 1>being on the platform. Now that's part of our terms

0:50:35.120 --> 0:50:38.000
<v Speaker 1>of service. If you don't want us to take your data,

0:50:38.400 --> 0:50:41.280
<v Speaker 1>don't be on Facebook. That's kind of the way that works.

0:50:41.480 --> 0:50:43.319
<v Speaker 1>So if you come across a video that says no

0:50:43.440 --> 0:50:47.480
<v Speaker 1>copyright infringement intended, or a picture on Instagram that clearly

0:50:47.840 --> 0:50:51.120
<v Speaker 1>doesn't belong to the account that posted it, just note

0:50:51.120 --> 0:50:55.120
<v Speaker 1>that that phrase means nothing. Intent is not part of

0:50:55.120 --> 0:50:58.480
<v Speaker 1>determining whether someone is infringing copyright in the first place.

0:50:58.719 --> 0:51:02.719
<v Speaker 1>It doesn't matter what you intend. There's definitely a gradient

0:51:02.880 --> 0:51:05.840
<v Speaker 1>when it comes to copyright infringement. Like if I include

0:51:05.880 --> 0:51:09.480
<v Speaker 1>half of a music video online, that's copyright infringement. But

0:51:09.520 --> 0:51:12.799
<v Speaker 1>if I include the whole thing, that is worse. And

0:51:12.880 --> 0:51:15.560
<v Speaker 1>if I monetize the video where I do it, that's

0:51:15.760 --> 0:51:19.600
<v Speaker 1>even worse. But even that smallest first example I gave

0:51:19.719 --> 0:51:22.680
<v Speaker 1>is still infringing. Doesn't matter whether I think it is

0:51:22.760 --> 0:51:26.160
<v Speaker 1>or not. You know, if I can think something's not

0:51:26.239 --> 0:51:28.719
<v Speaker 1>a crime, but if legally it's a crime, it doesn't

0:51:28.760 --> 0:51:31.279
<v Speaker 1>really matter what I think. There are a lot of

0:51:31.280 --> 0:51:33.000
<v Speaker 1>other things I need to say about this, but one

0:51:33.000 --> 0:51:35.000
<v Speaker 1>thing I want to sum up with right here before

0:51:35.000 --> 0:51:37.560
<v Speaker 1>I close out, and we will pick back up in

0:51:37.600 --> 0:51:41.040
<v Speaker 1>the next episode, is that Tom Scott did a great

0:51:41.160 --> 0:51:44.400
<v Speaker 1>job exploring the issues of copyright and YouTube in particular,

0:51:44.680 --> 0:51:46.720
<v Speaker 1>and I'll look more at YouTube. In the next episode,

0:51:47.239 --> 0:51:51.440
<v Speaker 1>he did in a video titled YouTube's copyright system Isn't broken,

0:51:51.719 --> 0:51:55.040
<v Speaker 1>the World's is, and shout out to listener Kat, who

0:51:55.080 --> 0:51:57.880
<v Speaker 1>first turned me onto Tom Scott's videos. Scott does what

0:51:57.960 --> 0:52:01.080
<v Speaker 1>I do, only he does it with British accent, so

0:52:01.320 --> 0:52:03.640
<v Speaker 1>he's better at it than I am by default. Also,

0:52:03.680 --> 0:52:06.960
<v Speaker 1>he's genuinely good at explaining stuff like this, so make

0:52:07.000 --> 0:52:09.279
<v Speaker 1>sure you check that out. And we'll come back to

0:52:09.360 --> 0:52:13.080
<v Speaker 1>talk more about YouTube and copyright infringement and content i

0:52:13.200 --> 0:52:15.160
<v Speaker 1>D and some of the laws that have been passed

0:52:15.760 --> 0:52:19.400
<v Speaker 1>after big media companies have lobbied Congress in the United

0:52:19.440 --> 0:52:23.279
<v Speaker 1>States that have changed the way information gets shared on

0:52:23.280 --> 0:52:26.960
<v Speaker 1>the Internet. We'll also talk about some of the crazy

0:52:27.160 --> 0:52:30.400
<v Speaker 1>movements that companies have made against individuals and an effort

0:52:30.400 --> 0:52:33.880
<v Speaker 1>to crack down on things like piracy. Because all this

0:52:33.960 --> 0:52:36.840
<v Speaker 1>is tied up together and it's all a mess, and

0:52:36.920 --> 0:52:39.319
<v Speaker 1>really what it boils down to is that copyright law

0:52:39.320 --> 0:52:45.000
<v Speaker 1>itself is in dire need of a full rewrite. But

0:52:45.760 --> 0:52:49.640
<v Speaker 1>that's dangerous because the parties that are particularly interested in

0:52:49.640 --> 0:52:52.600
<v Speaker 1>a rewrite of copyright law are not looking to make

0:52:52.640 --> 0:52:57.359
<v Speaker 1>it better. They're looking to make it last longer. That's

0:52:57.360 --> 0:52:59.960
<v Speaker 1>it for this episode. Later this week, we'll pick back

0:53:00.080 --> 0:53:04.600
<v Speaker 1>up with more about copyright, fair use, and piracy and

0:53:04.600 --> 0:53:07.799
<v Speaker 1>things of that nature, and talk about the problems that

0:53:07.880 --> 0:53:11.240
<v Speaker 1>technology have created for companies as well as the problems

0:53:11.320 --> 0:53:16.319
<v Speaker 1>companies have placed upon people and more so. I hope

0:53:16.320 --> 0:53:19.040
<v Speaker 1>you enjoyed this. You have any requests for things I

0:53:19.080 --> 0:53:21.600
<v Speaker 1>should cover in future episodes of tech Stuff, reach out

0:53:21.600 --> 0:53:23.719
<v Speaker 1>to me on Twitter. The handle for the show is

0:53:23.840 --> 0:53:26.640
<v Speaker 1>text Stuff H s W and I'll talk to you

0:53:26.680 --> 0:53:36.680
<v Speaker 1>again really soon. Tex Stuff is an I Heart Radio production.

0:53:36.920 --> 0:53:39.719
<v Speaker 1>For more podcasts from my Heart Radio, visit the i

0:53:39.840 --> 0:53:43.080
<v Speaker 1>heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to

0:53:43.120 --> 0:53:44.000
<v Speaker 1>your favorite shows.