WEBVTT - Copyright and Fair Use

0:00:04.400 --> 0:00:07.800
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to tech Stuff, a production from I Heart Radio.

0:00:12.039 --> 0:00:14.720
<v Speaker 1>Hey there, and welcome to tech Stuff. I'm your host,

0:00:14.880 --> 0:00:17.640
<v Speaker 1>Jonathan Strickland. I'm an executive producer with I Heart Radio,

0:00:17.960 --> 0:00:21.760
<v Speaker 1>and I love all things tech. And it has been

0:00:21.800 --> 0:00:24.880
<v Speaker 1>a while since I've done an episode about the concepts

0:00:24.880 --> 0:00:29.040
<v Speaker 1>of copyright and fair use. And after I keep seeing

0:00:29.040 --> 0:00:33.559
<v Speaker 1>the phrase no copyright infringement intended over and over on

0:00:33.680 --> 0:00:38.040
<v Speaker 1>places like YouTube and Instagram, I figure it's a good

0:00:38.040 --> 0:00:42.080
<v Speaker 1>time to tackle this again. Because people continue to pretend

0:00:42.479 --> 0:00:49.519
<v Speaker 1>like copyright infringement only applies under very specific circumstances and

0:00:49.600 --> 0:00:52.559
<v Speaker 1>that with just a little bit of verbiage you can

0:00:52.560 --> 0:00:55.960
<v Speaker 1>get around it, when really the opposite is true. And

0:00:56.000 --> 0:00:59.080
<v Speaker 1>since the Internet and technology allows for more opportunities for

0:00:59.080 --> 0:01:04.319
<v Speaker 1>a copyright in fringe mint, and because various governments and

0:01:04.440 --> 0:01:07.480
<v Speaker 1>around the world have past legislation to, you know, specifically

0:01:07.520 --> 0:01:12.720
<v Speaker 1>tackle copyright infringement, and companies have lobbied endlessly for more

0:01:13.240 --> 0:01:18.080
<v Speaker 1>restrictive copyright rules, I think it fits the scope of

0:01:18.360 --> 0:01:21.920
<v Speaker 1>tech stuff, particularly since a lot of these laws were

0:01:21.959 --> 0:01:27.240
<v Speaker 1>formed in reaction to changes in technology. So first, let's

0:01:27.319 --> 0:01:33.800
<v Speaker 1>kind of define what copyright is now. Essentially, copyright guarantees

0:01:33.840 --> 0:01:36.840
<v Speaker 1>the creator of a work or an entity that has

0:01:36.880 --> 0:01:40.520
<v Speaker 1>been designated by the creator of the work, the right

0:01:40.760 --> 0:01:45.000
<v Speaker 1>to profit off of that work, the right to make

0:01:45.400 --> 0:01:50.560
<v Speaker 1>copies of that work and then distribute or sell them,

0:01:50.760 --> 0:01:54.200
<v Speaker 1>or you know, you just you own that intellectual property.

0:01:54.240 --> 0:01:56.840
<v Speaker 1>No one else can come and make copies of it

0:01:56.880 --> 0:02:01.120
<v Speaker 1>without your permission. The works in this case range from

0:02:01.200 --> 0:02:06.440
<v Speaker 1>the written word to music too, paintings, sculpture, uh to

0:02:06.680 --> 0:02:10.040
<v Speaker 1>digital files. I mean, copyright now applies to lots of stuff.

0:02:10.080 --> 0:02:12.480
<v Speaker 1>Clearly it didn't apply to all of that in the beginning,

0:02:13.080 --> 0:02:15.959
<v Speaker 1>but something that has a vaulved over time. It does

0:02:16.000 --> 0:02:20.959
<v Speaker 1>not include inventions. Those are covered under patent law. And

0:02:21.000 --> 0:02:23.800
<v Speaker 1>then you also have things like trademarks, which make things

0:02:24.120 --> 0:02:28.480
<v Speaker 1>more complicated. I might talk about trademarks and copyright in

0:02:28.560 --> 0:02:32.280
<v Speaker 1>a future episode to kind of talk about how those

0:02:32.320 --> 0:02:36.160
<v Speaker 1>complicate things, because companies have tried to use trademarks in

0:02:36.240 --> 0:02:42.519
<v Speaker 1>order to extend copyright protection. But trademarks last in perpetuity.

0:02:43.040 --> 0:02:46.760
<v Speaker 1>Copyright only lasts a certain amount of time, at least

0:02:46.760 --> 0:02:49.800
<v Speaker 1>in theory. We'll get to all that. So along with

0:02:49.840 --> 0:02:53.400
<v Speaker 1>the right to profit from intellectual property comes with it

0:02:53.919 --> 0:02:57.400
<v Speaker 1>protections against others who are taking a work and profiting

0:02:57.440 --> 0:03:01.920
<v Speaker 1>off of it without permission. You can see the value

0:03:02.000 --> 0:03:05.919
<v Speaker 1>of this concept right away, I imagine. So let's say

0:03:06.160 --> 0:03:10.240
<v Speaker 1>you are a musician and you write a song. It

0:03:10.320 --> 0:03:13.400
<v Speaker 1>was your work, You create the whole piece, You wrote

0:03:13.400 --> 0:03:15.959
<v Speaker 1>the music, and you wrote the lyrics, and you plan

0:03:16.120 --> 0:03:19.520
<v Speaker 1>to earn money through this song. Maybe you're going to

0:03:19.560 --> 0:03:22.880
<v Speaker 1>record it to some form of media and then sell

0:03:23.080 --> 0:03:26.560
<v Speaker 1>copies of the song. So you filed a copyright for

0:03:26.680 --> 0:03:29.280
<v Speaker 1>the song, which gives you the exclusive rights to make

0:03:29.400 --> 0:03:33.840
<v Speaker 1>copies of it uh in whatever format you like, whether

0:03:33.880 --> 0:03:38.160
<v Speaker 1>it's digital files or physical media, or even like sheet music.

0:03:38.800 --> 0:03:41.960
<v Speaker 1>You can charge whatever you like for your work, though

0:03:42.000 --> 0:03:43.760
<v Speaker 1>obviously if you go bonkers and you ask for a

0:03:43.880 --> 0:03:47.240
<v Speaker 1>ridiculously high price, you aren't likely to get a lot

0:03:47.280 --> 0:03:51.080
<v Speaker 1>of takers. You also have the protection should someone else

0:03:51.240 --> 0:03:55.280
<v Speaker 1>start making copies of your song without your permission. Maybe

0:03:55.360 --> 0:03:58.520
<v Speaker 1>they are performing it themselves, in which case they should

0:03:59.000 --> 0:04:03.160
<v Speaker 1>secure a license first, or maybe they're taking your original

0:04:03.200 --> 0:04:06.800
<v Speaker 1>recording and just duplicating it. So let's say that you

0:04:07.480 --> 0:04:10.840
<v Speaker 1>created an MP three file and they just copy the

0:04:10.920 --> 0:04:14.600
<v Speaker 1>MP three file endlessly and start either giving it away

0:04:14.680 --> 0:04:17.479
<v Speaker 1>or selling it to people. You could sue that person,

0:04:17.839 --> 0:04:21.640
<v Speaker 1>and in court you could prove that you hold the

0:04:21.680 --> 0:04:24.960
<v Speaker 1>copyright to that piece of music, and assuming the court

0:04:25.000 --> 0:04:28.400
<v Speaker 1>agrees with that the copyright is legitimate, you could then

0:04:28.440 --> 0:04:32.680
<v Speaker 1>seek damages against the person or entity that made the

0:04:32.760 --> 0:04:37.599
<v Speaker 1>unauthorized copies of your work. Music is actually really a

0:04:37.640 --> 0:04:41.839
<v Speaker 1>special case because you can have multiple copyrights on the work.

0:04:41.920 --> 0:04:44.720
<v Speaker 1>You could have one for the lyrics, then you could

0:04:44.720 --> 0:04:48.200
<v Speaker 1>have another for the musical composition itself, and that would

0:04:48.200 --> 0:04:51.120
<v Speaker 1>mean that someone who wanted to play your music but

0:04:51.360 --> 0:04:56.880
<v Speaker 1>change the lyrics would still potentially be liable for copyright violations.

0:04:56.920 --> 0:04:58.760
<v Speaker 1>But we're going to get back to that a little

0:04:58.760 --> 0:05:01.200
<v Speaker 1>bit later in this episode, but it is something to

0:05:01.279 --> 0:05:03.920
<v Speaker 1>keep in mind. However, Then there are such things as

0:05:04.040 --> 0:05:07.440
<v Speaker 1>mechanical licenses. This sets out the rules for stuff like

0:05:07.880 --> 0:05:12.120
<v Speaker 1>playing recorded music in particular places. So if you've ever

0:05:12.200 --> 0:05:15.920
<v Speaker 1>been to like a restaurant or a theater and you've

0:05:15.960 --> 0:05:20.080
<v Speaker 1>heard music being played over the sound system, chances are

0:05:21.120 --> 0:05:25.440
<v Speaker 1>that that place of business has paid out a license

0:05:25.520 --> 0:05:28.560
<v Speaker 1>fee in order to be able to do that. Intellectual

0:05:28.600 --> 0:05:33.159
<v Speaker 1>property rights get pretty complicated. Uh. It also depends upon

0:05:33.200 --> 0:05:35.839
<v Speaker 1>the size of the venue I might have to do

0:05:35.880 --> 0:05:38.719
<v Speaker 1>a future episode to kind of talk about all the exceptions, because,

0:05:38.760 --> 0:05:42.040
<v Speaker 1>as I said, it does get complicated, and in some cases,

0:05:42.080 --> 0:05:45.960
<v Speaker 1>if it's a very small venue, uh, they can sometimes

0:05:45.960 --> 0:05:47.960
<v Speaker 1>be exempt from having to pay the same sort of

0:05:48.000 --> 0:05:51.240
<v Speaker 1>license fees that larger venues have to pay. And part

0:05:51.279 --> 0:05:53.559
<v Speaker 1>of the argument there is that the number of people

0:05:53.600 --> 0:05:57.520
<v Speaker 1>who would actually experience the music is much smaller because

0:05:57.600 --> 0:06:02.120
<v Speaker 1>the venue is smaller. Anyway, in the old days, as

0:06:02.160 --> 0:06:06.360
<v Speaker 1>in before the printing press, copyright wasn't really that big

0:06:06.400 --> 0:06:08.880
<v Speaker 1>of a thing, Like, there wasn't a big concern for it.

0:06:09.320 --> 0:06:14.320
<v Speaker 1>There were predecessors for formal copyright, but truthfully, there wasn't

0:06:14.400 --> 0:06:17.520
<v Speaker 1>much occasion to use them because the act of copying

0:06:17.560 --> 0:06:21.960
<v Speaker 1>a work involved actually making a copy out by hand,

0:06:21.960 --> 0:06:25.599
<v Speaker 1>handwriting the copy of a written work. This was a

0:06:25.680 --> 0:06:29.240
<v Speaker 1>painstaking process and not something that could be done on

0:06:29.279 --> 0:06:33.160
<v Speaker 1>any sort of scale, and so copyright wasn't as huge

0:06:33.160 --> 0:06:36.360
<v Speaker 1>a concern just because infringement itself was not something that

0:06:36.440 --> 0:06:39.160
<v Speaker 1>was easy to do. And to that the fact that

0:06:39.520 --> 0:06:42.479
<v Speaker 1>much of the world's population was alliterate and there just

0:06:42.600 --> 0:06:45.880
<v Speaker 1>wasn't a foundation for copyright infringement to really take hold.

0:06:46.400 --> 0:06:48.919
<v Speaker 1>Then a smarty pants named Johann Gutenberg had to go

0:06:48.960 --> 0:06:52.039
<v Speaker 1>and invent the movable type printing press, at least the

0:06:52.080 --> 0:06:55.680
<v Speaker 1>European version. I should stress that Europe because other parts

0:06:55.720 --> 0:06:58.840
<v Speaker 1>of the world are actually further advanced with printing technologies

0:06:58.880 --> 0:07:01.800
<v Speaker 1>than Europe was. But this is the one that Western

0:07:01.920 --> 0:07:05.920
<v Speaker 1>cultures tend to talk about because we get a little myopic.

0:07:06.520 --> 0:07:08.919
<v Speaker 1>But i'll i'll set aside the commentary. So with the

0:07:08.960 --> 0:07:12.760
<v Speaker 1>printing press, it became possible to set the type on

0:07:12.840 --> 0:07:16.520
<v Speaker 1>the press and then print out sheets one after the

0:07:16.560 --> 0:07:20.119
<v Speaker 1>other in relatively quick succession. Now, it still took time

0:07:20.160 --> 0:07:22.920
<v Speaker 1>to set the press between pages because you had to

0:07:23.040 --> 0:07:25.400
<v Speaker 1>change all the type out right. You had to remove

0:07:25.520 --> 0:07:29.080
<v Speaker 1>all the type, set the type again, and then print

0:07:29.080 --> 0:07:32.680
<v Speaker 1>the next sheet. So you would typically use the press

0:07:32.760 --> 0:07:35.320
<v Speaker 1>to print a bunch of the same sheet in a

0:07:35.440 --> 0:07:38.440
<v Speaker 1>row before you would reset the type and move on

0:07:38.480 --> 0:07:41.240
<v Speaker 1>to the next sheet. However, you could also use a

0:07:41.360 --> 0:07:44.600
<v Speaker 1>single large sheet of paper to set up multiple pages

0:07:44.640 --> 0:07:50.160
<v Speaker 1>of text, and so you could divide up the quadrants

0:07:50.200 --> 0:07:52.880
<v Speaker 1>of a printing press and change the type up so

0:07:52.920 --> 0:07:57.880
<v Speaker 1>that you are actually creating multiple pages per press, and

0:07:57.920 --> 0:08:00.960
<v Speaker 1>then you fold the paper in such a way that

0:08:00.960 --> 0:08:03.080
<v Speaker 1>that makes all sense. Like if you fold it once

0:08:03.800 --> 0:08:06.200
<v Speaker 1>along a vertical line, so you you fold it in

0:08:06.280 --> 0:08:11.040
<v Speaker 1>half vertically, um then are along the vertical access, I

0:08:11.040 --> 0:08:14.440
<v Speaker 1>should say, then you end up with a folio that

0:08:14.640 --> 0:08:17.880
<v Speaker 1>was a single large sheet of paper that would have

0:08:17.960 --> 0:08:21.000
<v Speaker 1>one page printed on the left side, one page printed

0:08:21.040 --> 0:08:23.400
<v Speaker 1>on the right side. You have a vertical fold in

0:08:23.440 --> 0:08:26.200
<v Speaker 1>the middle, and then you can just keep printing those

0:08:26.240 --> 0:08:28.080
<v Speaker 1>over and over again, and then you bind a bunch

0:08:28.080 --> 0:08:31.960
<v Speaker 1>of those together and you've got a book. Or you

0:08:31.960 --> 0:08:36.160
<v Speaker 1>could do a double fold and you could have a quarto,

0:08:36.240 --> 0:08:38.199
<v Speaker 1>which would also involve you having to make a cut

0:08:38.240 --> 0:08:41.319
<v Speaker 1>along the horizontal line. But then you've got four pages

0:08:41.360 --> 0:08:44.719
<v Speaker 1>per sheet, so you could do that and that it

0:08:44.880 --> 0:08:49.679
<v Speaker 1>means that with one press you're effectively printing four pages,

0:08:50.559 --> 0:08:52.080
<v Speaker 1>and then you let it dry, you flip it over

0:08:52.120 --> 0:08:55.320
<v Speaker 1>and you can print another four pages. Very useful. So

0:08:55.960 --> 0:08:58.040
<v Speaker 1>this was these were different ways that you could end

0:08:58.120 --> 0:09:03.120
<v Speaker 1>up creating book fairly quickly. The process of publishing became

0:09:03.280 --> 0:09:05.960
<v Speaker 1>much faster than with people doing it by hand, but

0:09:06.040 --> 0:09:10.000
<v Speaker 1>there wasn't yet a formalized protection in place for the

0:09:10.040 --> 0:09:12.959
<v Speaker 1>creator of the works, and at this point, the typical

0:09:12.960 --> 0:09:15.960
<v Speaker 1>approach was for an author to receive a flat fee

0:09:16.160 --> 0:09:20.040
<v Speaker 1>for their work, which would then go to a book

0:09:20.080 --> 0:09:24.440
<v Speaker 1>printer to produce, so the printer would take ownership of

0:09:24.480 --> 0:09:27.000
<v Speaker 1>that work from that point forward. Then it was just

0:09:27.040 --> 0:09:29.480
<v Speaker 1>a matter of time before other printers would get hold

0:09:29.520 --> 0:09:32.200
<v Speaker 1>of the book and start making their own copies. At

0:09:32.240 --> 0:09:35.280
<v Speaker 1>least for books that proved to be popular for authors.

0:09:35.320 --> 0:09:38.360
<v Speaker 1>There really wasn't a whole lot of profit in this approach.

0:09:38.559 --> 0:09:42.520
<v Speaker 1>William Shakespeare, who you know you could argue, was one

0:09:42.559 --> 0:09:46.920
<v Speaker 1>of the greatest English writers, mostly known for his plays

0:09:47.000 --> 0:09:50.200
<v Speaker 1>but also his poetry. He never sought out the printing

0:09:50.320 --> 0:09:53.520
<v Speaker 1>of his plays. Others would give it a shot. Either

0:09:53.600 --> 0:09:56.160
<v Speaker 1>they would try to copy down plays as they were

0:09:56.160 --> 0:09:59.480
<v Speaker 1>being performed and then go and print what they had

0:09:59.520 --> 0:10:02.319
<v Speaker 1>trans rived, or they would try to get hold of

0:10:02.360 --> 0:10:05.000
<v Speaker 1>the sides that actors were using in their roles, or

0:10:05.040 --> 0:10:07.680
<v Speaker 1>a combination of the two. It was really only after

0:10:07.720 --> 0:10:11.240
<v Speaker 1>Shakespeare's death that his friends got together and did their

0:10:11.240 --> 0:10:15.360
<v Speaker 1>best to gather his plays and publish them. Now, based

0:10:15.360 --> 0:10:18.000
<v Speaker 1>on what I know about Shakespeare, I suspect the reason

0:10:18.040 --> 0:10:20.760
<v Speaker 1>that he did not seek out publication of his works

0:10:21.240 --> 0:10:24.000
<v Speaker 1>was that it really wasn't where the money would be

0:10:24.080 --> 0:10:27.120
<v Speaker 1>for him. He would get a pay the flat fee

0:10:27.240 --> 0:10:30.880
<v Speaker 1>for every play he wrote. But more importantly, he was

0:10:30.920 --> 0:10:34.960
<v Speaker 1>a part owner of the theater itself, like the Globe

0:10:35.040 --> 0:10:37.720
<v Speaker 1>Theater or the Rose Theater. He was part of the

0:10:37.720 --> 0:10:40.520
<v Speaker 1>company that owned the theater, so that meant he would

0:10:40.520 --> 0:10:43.560
<v Speaker 1>actually take a share of the box office. So, in

0:10:43.559 --> 0:10:47.200
<v Speaker 1>other words, his main goal was to attract crowds to

0:10:47.320 --> 0:10:50.559
<v Speaker 1>the theater. That's where the money was. But you can

0:10:50.600 --> 0:10:53.920
<v Speaker 1>bet that if there had been serious money in publication

0:10:54.160 --> 0:10:56.600
<v Speaker 1>back in those days, Shakespeare would have been all over

0:10:56.640 --> 0:10:58.880
<v Speaker 1>it because a quick glance at some of the lawsuits

0:10:58.920 --> 0:11:01.800
<v Speaker 1>he was involved with during his lifetime indicates he had

0:11:01.800 --> 0:11:06.000
<v Speaker 1>a certain appreciation for the accumulation of wealth. So Shakespeare,

0:11:06.040 --> 0:11:10.880
<v Speaker 1>great artist, also a business guy, and had publishing been

0:11:10.920 --> 0:11:14.080
<v Speaker 1>a bigger business for the author, he certainly would have

0:11:14.120 --> 0:11:16.760
<v Speaker 1>gone that route, I'm sure of it. Now. The printing

0:11:16.800 --> 0:11:20.760
<v Speaker 1>press was a truly transformational piece of technology. It became

0:11:21.040 --> 0:11:25.480
<v Speaker 1>easier to produce many copies of a work. Book printing businesses,

0:11:25.520 --> 0:11:29.600
<v Speaker 1>which would evolve into true publishing houses, began to pop

0:11:29.679 --> 0:11:33.000
<v Speaker 1>up all over Europe, and the powers that be, that is,

0:11:33.120 --> 0:11:36.720
<v Speaker 1>the Church and the various governments of Europe, viewed book

0:11:36.720 --> 0:11:40.880
<v Speaker 1>printers as both an asset and a potential threat. Through

0:11:40.960 --> 0:11:45.480
<v Speaker 1>the printers, these organizations could spread information quickly. The Bible

0:11:45.920 --> 0:11:48.960
<v Speaker 1>was a very early candidate for printing, as the Guttenberg

0:11:49.080 --> 0:11:52.800
<v Speaker 1>Bible proves and governments could use printing presses to spread

0:11:52.840 --> 0:11:55.920
<v Speaker 1>information about laws and declarations and that kind of thing.

0:11:56.360 --> 0:11:59.520
<v Speaker 1>But printing presses also meant it was easier to print

0:11:59.600 --> 0:12:03.559
<v Speaker 1>stuff that undermined authority. People who had a bone to

0:12:03.640 --> 0:12:06.840
<v Speaker 1>pick with the folks who were in charge could potentially

0:12:06.840 --> 0:12:11.000
<v Speaker 1>spread their ideas and maybe find sympathetic souls who shared

0:12:11.040 --> 0:12:15.760
<v Speaker 1>those same beliefs. So the printing press could enable existential

0:12:15.880 --> 0:12:18.760
<v Speaker 1>threats to the power structure. And this is where we

0:12:18.880 --> 0:12:24.400
<v Speaker 1>get a predecessor to copyright. Now, this predecessor wasn't so

0:12:24.520 --> 0:12:27.200
<v Speaker 1>much about making sure the author of a book was

0:12:27.280 --> 0:12:31.440
<v Speaker 1>fairly compensated. Instead, it was more about keeping printing houses

0:12:31.520 --> 0:12:35.360
<v Speaker 1>under control. The basic idea was that any business that

0:12:35.520 --> 0:12:39.240
<v Speaker 1>wished to print materials had to first secure an official

0:12:39.440 --> 0:12:43.600
<v Speaker 1>license from, you know, the government of that region. These

0:12:43.640 --> 0:12:47.680
<v Speaker 1>licenses typically meant that a specific printer would be responsible

0:12:47.720 --> 0:12:51.320
<v Speaker 1>for the printing of particular works to the exclusion of

0:12:51.360 --> 0:12:54.280
<v Speaker 1>all other printers. So you might say that this one

0:12:54.360 --> 0:12:58.960
<v Speaker 1>printer can print this one book, and no other printer

0:12:59.120 --> 0:13:01.480
<v Speaker 1>in the region is a allowed to do that, so

0:13:01.640 --> 0:13:04.640
<v Speaker 1>they have a monopoly on that specific title. In fact,

0:13:04.679 --> 0:13:08.280
<v Speaker 1>they called the monopolies. These agreements would last a set

0:13:08.360 --> 0:13:11.280
<v Speaker 1>number of years, which wasn't too different from the concept

0:13:11.360 --> 0:13:15.200
<v Speaker 1>of modern copyrights. If any other printer was found to

0:13:15.200 --> 0:13:19.520
<v Speaker 1>produce a work that some other printer had exclusive rights to,

0:13:20.120 --> 0:13:22.400
<v Speaker 1>that matter could go to court. But this was all

0:13:22.440 --> 0:13:27.640
<v Speaker 1>about the printing houses, not authors. England passed its first

0:13:27.679 --> 0:13:32.360
<v Speaker 1>actual copyright law in seventeen. This law changed things quite

0:13:32.400 --> 0:13:35.040
<v Speaker 1>a bit. A publisher would have a fourteen year period

0:13:35.080 --> 0:13:39.240
<v Speaker 1>of exclusive rights to publish any new book. Existing books

0:13:39.240 --> 0:13:42.760
<v Speaker 1>that the printing house was already printing would enjoy protection

0:13:42.800 --> 0:13:46.200
<v Speaker 1>for twenty one years. After that, the author of the

0:13:46.240 --> 0:13:49.640
<v Speaker 1>work could choose to renew the copyright if the author

0:13:49.720 --> 0:13:53.040
<v Speaker 1>was still alive. Otherwise the work would enter into the

0:13:53.080 --> 0:13:57.240
<v Speaker 1>public domain, meaning anyone would be legally allowed to make

0:13:57.280 --> 0:14:00.160
<v Speaker 1>a copy of that work or use it in any

0:13:59.840 --> 0:14:03.280
<v Speaker 1>way they liked. There were no longer any protections on

0:14:03.320 --> 0:14:06.480
<v Speaker 1>that piece of work, and it was available for any

0:14:06.520 --> 0:14:10.280
<v Speaker 1>public use. The United States wouldn't get its first true

0:14:10.280 --> 0:14:14.480
<v Speaker 1>copyright law until nearly a century later. But let's be fair,

0:14:15.000 --> 0:14:17.280
<v Speaker 1>there was no such thing as the United States in

0:14:17.400 --> 0:14:20.320
<v Speaker 1>seventeen ten, so I'm gonna cut the young nations some

0:14:20.400 --> 0:14:23.680
<v Speaker 1>slack here. The copyright law of the US followed closely

0:14:23.720 --> 0:14:26.720
<v Speaker 1>in the footsteps of the Copyright Act of Britain, which

0:14:26.760 --> 0:14:29.360
<v Speaker 1>was also known as the Statute of Ann as in

0:14:29.560 --> 0:14:33.760
<v Speaker 1>Queen Anne. So the way that the US law worked

0:14:33.800 --> 0:14:36.120
<v Speaker 1>was that an author would register their work with the

0:14:36.240 --> 0:14:40.160
<v Speaker 1>U S District Court of their particular region, and they

0:14:40.160 --> 0:14:43.720
<v Speaker 1>would in return receive an exclusive copyright for fourteen years,

0:14:43.760 --> 0:14:46.960
<v Speaker 1>with the option to renew for a second fourteen year period,

0:14:47.360 --> 0:14:49.920
<v Speaker 1>and after those twenty eight years, assuming that you actually

0:14:50.000 --> 0:14:53.120
<v Speaker 1>renewed your copyright, the work would then enter into the

0:14:53.120 --> 0:14:56.520
<v Speaker 1>public domain with the Statute of Ann and the Copyright

0:14:56.560 --> 0:14:59.080
<v Speaker 1>Act of seventeen nine in the US or at the

0:14:59.080 --> 0:15:01.400
<v Speaker 1>point where authors would get a little more protection and

0:15:01.400 --> 0:15:04.360
<v Speaker 1>a chance to benefit more from their own work. It

0:15:04.480 --> 0:15:07.000
<v Speaker 1>was no longer the case of a one time flat

0:15:07.080 --> 0:15:11.000
<v Speaker 1>fee in every instance. Now, I say authors, but often

0:15:11.040 --> 0:15:15.120
<v Speaker 1>we're really still talking about publishers. Here. The publisher retains

0:15:15.160 --> 0:15:17.920
<v Speaker 1>the copyright because the copyright allows the publisher to you know,

0:15:18.960 --> 0:15:22.200
<v Speaker 1>publish the works. Otherwise the author would have to grant

0:15:22.240 --> 0:15:25.080
<v Speaker 1>permission for each printing, you'd have to have a license

0:15:25.160 --> 0:15:27.920
<v Speaker 1>for it. It all gets clunky. Right that the author

0:15:28.000 --> 0:15:31.680
<v Speaker 1>has exclusive copyright to their work, they have to grant

0:15:31.880 --> 0:15:36.400
<v Speaker 1>permission to whichever entity is creating copies of that work.

0:15:37.040 --> 0:15:39.840
<v Speaker 1>You often see this reflected today in ways that are

0:15:40.000 --> 0:15:44.360
<v Speaker 1>kind of confusing. When you agree to certain platforms, there's

0:15:44.440 --> 0:15:47.240
<v Speaker 1>language there that seems to suggest that anything you post

0:15:47.280 --> 0:15:53.560
<v Speaker 1>on that platform is that platform's property. But usually the

0:15:53.640 --> 0:15:56.240
<v Speaker 1>reasoning for the language is to make sure that the

0:15:56.320 --> 0:16:00.560
<v Speaker 1>platform has the necessary permission to display whatever it is

0:16:00.600 --> 0:16:04.640
<v Speaker 1>you're posting, because otherwise, every single time you posted, you

0:16:04.640 --> 0:16:07.520
<v Speaker 1>would have to have some sort of licensing agreement or

0:16:07.960 --> 0:16:11.720
<v Speaker 1>something that would give permission to the platform to actually

0:16:11.760 --> 0:16:15.880
<v Speaker 1>display the thing you wrote. It gets pretty complicated now.

0:16:15.920 --> 0:16:18.800
<v Speaker 1>The same would be true for most music produced in

0:16:18.840 --> 0:16:23.040
<v Speaker 1>the modern era. The copyright isn't necessarily held by the artist,

0:16:23.560 --> 0:16:26.400
<v Speaker 1>but by a music label. And it's kind of like

0:16:26.440 --> 0:16:28.960
<v Speaker 1>how Thomas Edison made sure that his name was on

0:16:29.080 --> 0:16:32.840
<v Speaker 1>every patent produced out of his business. He might not

0:16:32.920 --> 0:16:35.800
<v Speaker 1>have had a direct hand in the creation of every invention.

0:16:36.080 --> 0:16:38.680
<v Speaker 1>In fact, we know that he didn't have a direct

0:16:38.720 --> 0:16:41.200
<v Speaker 1>hand in a lot of them, but he sure as

0:16:41.240 --> 0:16:43.800
<v Speaker 1>heck made sure that his signature was on the patent

0:16:43.840 --> 0:16:45.520
<v Speaker 1>to every single one, so that he had a right

0:16:45.560 --> 0:16:49.680
<v Speaker 1>to each of them anyway. One of the consequences of

0:16:49.720 --> 0:16:52.200
<v Speaker 1>all of this is that, to this day, getting the

0:16:52.200 --> 0:16:55.640
<v Speaker 1>permission of an author or artist in order to use

0:16:55.680 --> 0:17:00.920
<v Speaker 1>their work typically isn't enough. That's because in many cases

0:17:01.120 --> 0:17:06.480
<v Speaker 1>that individual creator doesn't actually hold the copyright to the work.

0:17:06.880 --> 0:17:11.000
<v Speaker 1>It's more likely that some corporate entity will hold the

0:17:11.040 --> 0:17:14.960
<v Speaker 1>copyright on behalf of that creator. So you really have

0:17:15.080 --> 0:17:18.560
<v Speaker 1>to get the permission of whatever entity holds the copyright

0:17:18.600 --> 0:17:21.600
<v Speaker 1>for any specific intellectual property. In some cases it might

0:17:21.640 --> 0:17:25.200
<v Speaker 1>be an individual creator, in other cases it might be

0:17:25.440 --> 0:17:29.760
<v Speaker 1>a big company. So let's say if you met an

0:17:29.880 --> 0:17:33.960
<v Speaker 1>artist for Disney in a cafe and this artist told you, oh,

0:17:33.960 --> 0:17:38.119
<v Speaker 1>it's totally cool if you use they're drawing of a

0:17:38.200 --> 0:17:42.320
<v Speaker 1>popular Disney character for something you're doing, that's probably not

0:17:42.359 --> 0:17:46.720
<v Speaker 1>good enough because that artist wouldn't even hold the copyright

0:17:47.080 --> 0:17:51.600
<v Speaker 1>for that work. Disney would, and copyright laws would evolve

0:17:51.760 --> 0:17:55.800
<v Speaker 1>quite a lot over the following centuries. They expanded to

0:17:55.880 --> 0:17:59.240
<v Speaker 1>include more types of works, as well as to allow

0:17:59.280 --> 0:18:03.000
<v Speaker 1>for things like licenses, and without these considerations, it might

0:18:03.040 --> 0:18:06.480
<v Speaker 1>be illegal to you know, play playback an album without

0:18:06.520 --> 0:18:09.960
<v Speaker 1>first getting permission of the music label, which is clearly absurd.

0:18:10.000 --> 0:18:12.800
<v Speaker 1>You wouldn't have it where you bought an album, you

0:18:12.880 --> 0:18:15.720
<v Speaker 1>went home, and every time you were to play the

0:18:15.760 --> 0:18:19.280
<v Speaker 1>album you first had to get permission from the music

0:18:19.440 --> 0:18:22.399
<v Speaker 1>label to do that. That just doesn't make sense. But

0:18:22.480 --> 0:18:24.439
<v Speaker 1>that's the sort of stuff that actually had to be

0:18:24.520 --> 0:18:28.760
<v Speaker 1>codified into law. It's you know, it's not enough to

0:18:28.880 --> 0:18:32.159
<v Speaker 1>just everyone agree like, oh well, that's absurd. It actually

0:18:32.160 --> 0:18:35.720
<v Speaker 1>had to be written down somewhere and ratified. One of

0:18:35.760 --> 0:18:39.560
<v Speaker 1>the biggest changes to copyright has been how long that

0:18:39.680 --> 0:18:44.160
<v Speaker 1>copyright protection lasts. This also ties into how many capitalist

0:18:44.240 --> 0:18:50.840
<v Speaker 1>societies treat corporations, which is uh ridiculously in my mind.

0:18:51.000 --> 0:18:53.479
<v Speaker 1>So here in the United States in particular, corporations are

0:18:53.520 --> 0:18:56.680
<v Speaker 1>treated legally like a person. But if you think about

0:18:56.760 --> 0:18:59.600
<v Speaker 1>that's kind of bonkers. More than kind of bonkers, I

0:18:59.600 --> 0:19:04.760
<v Speaker 1>should say, people get old, people pass away corporations. Assuming

0:19:04.760 --> 0:19:07.320
<v Speaker 1>that they are run well and they provide some sort

0:19:07.320 --> 0:19:11.080
<v Speaker 1>of goods or services that people want or need, they

0:19:11.080 --> 0:19:15.320
<v Speaker 1>can exist indefinitely. And a corporation that relies heavily on

0:19:15.440 --> 0:19:20.520
<v Speaker 1>intellectual property is quite loath to give up that meal ticket,

0:19:20.760 --> 0:19:24.439
<v Speaker 1>and so corporations over the years have lobbied hard to

0:19:24.560 --> 0:19:28.119
<v Speaker 1>extend copyright in order to prevent the i P that

0:19:28.200 --> 0:19:30.760
<v Speaker 1>they own from falling into the public domain. And then

0:19:30.800 --> 0:19:36.359
<v Speaker 1>they can no longer exclusively exploit that i P. They

0:19:36.359 --> 0:19:39.320
<v Speaker 1>could still exploit it, they can still sell stuff with it,

0:19:40.240 --> 0:19:42.920
<v Speaker 1>just it doesn't stop anyone else from doing the same thing.

0:19:43.480 --> 0:19:46.960
<v Speaker 1>Perhaps the most high profile of all these companies was

0:19:47.000 --> 0:19:50.400
<v Speaker 1>one that seemed fixated on a particular mouse that I've

0:19:50.440 --> 0:20:02.200
<v Speaker 1>already mentioned. I'll explain more after this quick break. Before

0:20:02.240 --> 0:20:04.920
<v Speaker 1>the break, I t s that corporations played a huge

0:20:04.920 --> 0:20:08.439
<v Speaker 1>part in lobbying Congress to extend the protections of copyright,

0:20:09.000 --> 0:20:12.560
<v Speaker 1>and one of those corporations is the Walt Disney Company

0:20:12.760 --> 0:20:16.800
<v Speaker 1>and the cultural phenomenon that is Mickey Mouse. The cartoon

0:20:16.920 --> 0:20:20.960
<v Speaker 1>Steamboat Willie, which was the first Mickey Mouse cartoon, was

0:20:21.000 --> 0:20:25.320
<v Speaker 1>released in nineteen twenty eight. Now, at that time, US

0:20:25.400 --> 0:20:29.240
<v Speaker 1>copyright law had a twenty eight year protection limit, which

0:20:29.240 --> 0:20:32.919
<v Speaker 1>could then be renewed for a second twenty eight year term,

0:20:32.960 --> 0:20:36.119
<v Speaker 1>which would provide a total of fifty six years of

0:20:36.160 --> 0:20:40.040
<v Speaker 1>copyright exclusivity to the owner of an i P, but

0:20:40.160 --> 0:20:43.240
<v Speaker 1>then the i P would enter the public domain. That

0:20:43.320 --> 0:20:48.640
<v Speaker 1>means that if copyright law had remained unchanged since Steamboat Willie,

0:20:49.040 --> 0:20:52.040
<v Speaker 1>Steamboat Willie would have entered the public domain back in

0:20:52.400 --> 0:20:57.600
<v Speaker 1>nineteen four. Spoiler alert, As of the recording of this podcast,

0:20:57.760 --> 0:21:01.520
<v Speaker 1>Steamboat Willie is not in the public domain yet, so

0:21:01.640 --> 0:21:05.200
<v Speaker 1>things did not remain the same. By the nineteen seventies,

0:21:05.359 --> 0:21:09.000
<v Speaker 1>the Disney Company was lobbying hard to change copyright laws,

0:21:09.119 --> 0:21:11.639
<v Speaker 1>and I want to be clear, they weren't the only ones,

0:21:12.359 --> 0:21:18.160
<v Speaker 1>but you frequently hear Disney specifically in regard to lobbying

0:21:18.200 --> 0:21:22.280
<v Speaker 1>for copyright law extensions, and it worked. Congress changed the

0:21:22.320 --> 0:21:26.159
<v Speaker 1>copyright protection so that copyrights that were held by individual

0:21:26.240 --> 0:21:31.119
<v Speaker 1>authors protection would last the lifetime of that author plus

0:21:31.200 --> 0:21:35.679
<v Speaker 1>another fifty years. So now we're well beyond guaranteeing the

0:21:35.800 --> 0:21:37.960
<v Speaker 1>right of a person to profit off of their work.

0:21:38.119 --> 0:21:42.399
<v Speaker 1>Right now, you're saying you're guaranteeing that multiple generations of

0:21:42.440 --> 0:21:45.879
<v Speaker 1>an author's family can continue to benefit from the work

0:21:46.160 --> 0:21:50.080
<v Speaker 1>of the author. The author will be dead and fifty

0:21:50.160 --> 0:21:53.000
<v Speaker 1>years will pass, and until those fifty years are up,

0:21:53.080 --> 0:21:59.040
<v Speaker 1>the estate will continue to benefit monetarily from that author's work,

0:21:59.119 --> 0:22:01.920
<v Speaker 1>assuming that you know, people are still buying it. Obviously,

0:22:02.320 --> 0:22:04.800
<v Speaker 1>if it falls out of favor and no one's purchasing anything,

0:22:04.880 --> 0:22:10.080
<v Speaker 1>then those rights, while they're important, don't actually leverage into

0:22:10.119 --> 0:22:13.560
<v Speaker 1>any kind of monetary gain. But this is where I

0:22:13.600 --> 0:22:15.920
<v Speaker 1>start feeling a little weird about all this, because I

0:22:15.960 --> 0:22:18.439
<v Speaker 1>think it's one thing to want to provide for your family,

0:22:18.800 --> 0:22:23.440
<v Speaker 1>right you want to earn money and help contribute to

0:22:23.680 --> 0:22:28.119
<v Speaker 1>your family or households well being. But it's another to

0:22:28.200 --> 0:22:32.240
<v Speaker 1>create generational wealth that removes the need for future generations

0:22:32.240 --> 0:22:36.119
<v Speaker 1>to you know, make any sort of meaningful contribution themselves.

0:22:36.520 --> 0:22:40.440
<v Speaker 1>There are lots of cases where the children of authors

0:22:40.480 --> 0:22:45.199
<v Speaker 1>who were incredibly successful, uh have themselves gone on to

0:22:45.280 --> 0:22:48.520
<v Speaker 1>do amazing things, which is great. But there are also

0:22:48.560 --> 0:22:51.920
<v Speaker 1>cases of people who just kind of, you know, never

0:22:52.160 --> 0:22:55.320
<v Speaker 1>bothered to do anything because they didn't really have a

0:22:55.480 --> 0:22:58.240
<v Speaker 1>need to. They were all of their needs were already

0:22:58.280 --> 0:23:03.639
<v Speaker 1>met because they were earning income on something that their

0:23:03.680 --> 0:23:08.280
<v Speaker 1>parents or grandparents or great grandparents had done, and there

0:23:08.320 --> 0:23:10.719
<v Speaker 1>never was any need for them to do anything. Uh.

0:23:10.960 --> 0:23:16.760
<v Speaker 1>Not super helpful for the general society. Not very healthy

0:23:16.800 --> 0:23:20.800
<v Speaker 1>in my mind anyway, for corporations that owned I P.

0:23:21.520 --> 0:23:24.359
<v Speaker 1>It was a different story, right, because corporations don't die,

0:23:24.480 --> 0:23:26.879
<v Speaker 1>so you can't say the life of a corporation plus

0:23:26.920 --> 0:23:31.760
<v Speaker 1>fifty years. So in this case, the copyright protection extended

0:23:31.800 --> 0:23:34.680
<v Speaker 1>the term for works that had been published before nine

0:23:36.000 --> 0:23:38.960
<v Speaker 1>to a total term of seventy five years of protection.

0:23:39.560 --> 0:23:43.160
<v Speaker 1>Uh the Copyright Extension pushed that that protection of Steamboat

0:23:43.160 --> 0:23:45.399
<v Speaker 1>willie to two thousand three because of that, because it

0:23:45.400 --> 0:23:48.600
<v Speaker 1>was published in nineteen seventy five years later would be

0:23:48.680 --> 0:23:53.440
<v Speaker 1>up to two thousand three. However, in nineteen Congress passed

0:23:53.440 --> 0:23:57.000
<v Speaker 1>the Copyright Term Extension Act, also known as the Sunny

0:23:57.040 --> 0:24:00.960
<v Speaker 1>Buno Copyright Term Extension Act after the late congressman and

0:24:01.040 --> 0:24:04.639
<v Speaker 1>musician Sonny Bono. Bono had passed away in an accident

0:24:04.680 --> 0:24:07.719
<v Speaker 1>while Congress was hashing out this extension bill, so he

0:24:07.760 --> 0:24:11.600
<v Speaker 1>was posthumously honored with the title of the the Act.

0:24:12.400 --> 0:24:15.960
<v Speaker 1>This act extended the copyright protection for any work published

0:24:15.960 --> 0:24:19.560
<v Speaker 1>in nineteen twenty three or later, and the extension meant

0:24:19.880 --> 0:24:23.399
<v Speaker 1>that the copyright protection now went from the life of

0:24:23.440 --> 0:24:26.639
<v Speaker 1>the author plus fifty years to the life of the

0:24:26.680 --> 0:24:29.919
<v Speaker 1>author plus seventy years for those works that were created

0:24:29.920 --> 0:24:33.439
<v Speaker 1>by an individual artist, and it meant for works of

0:24:33.560 --> 0:24:38.560
<v Speaker 1>corporate authorship, you know, works that like Steamboat Willie from Disney,

0:24:38.600 --> 0:24:41.119
<v Speaker 1>they went from having seventy five years of protection to

0:24:41.240 --> 0:24:45.639
<v Speaker 1>either ninety five years after publication or one twenty years

0:24:45.680 --> 0:24:49.399
<v Speaker 1>from the date of creation, whichever ended earlier. So you know,

0:24:49.640 --> 0:24:54.040
<v Speaker 1>corporate corporations might create something but not yet publish it.

0:24:54.480 --> 0:24:57.960
<v Speaker 1>So in some cases you would actually have a shorter

0:24:58.080 --> 0:25:01.399
<v Speaker 1>period between time of creation and hundred twenty years then

0:25:01.480 --> 0:25:05.600
<v Speaker 1>time of publication in ninety five years. Anyway, any published

0:25:05.600 --> 0:25:08.720
<v Speaker 1>work before nineteen seventy eight would get an additional twenty

0:25:08.800 --> 0:25:12.200
<v Speaker 1>years of copyright protection, so they went from seventy five

0:25:12.280 --> 0:25:14.960
<v Speaker 1>years to ninety five years, and those extra twenty years

0:25:14.960 --> 0:25:18.399
<v Speaker 1>meant that Steamboat Willie will now enter public domain essentially

0:25:18.440 --> 0:25:22.000
<v Speaker 1>at the beginning of twenty twenty four, unless between now

0:25:22.000 --> 0:25:24.680
<v Speaker 1>and then there's yet another change to copyright law, which

0:25:24.680 --> 0:25:30.560
<v Speaker 1>seems highly unlikely because there is a large opposition to that.

0:25:31.320 --> 0:25:34.600
<v Speaker 1>Since the Copyright Act I've mentioned so far retroactively protected

0:25:34.640 --> 0:25:38.040
<v Speaker 1>any work published after nineteen twenty three, it meant that

0:25:38.080 --> 0:25:40.919
<v Speaker 1>we finally saw some published works go into the public

0:25:40.960 --> 0:25:46.520
<v Speaker 1>domain beginning in twenty nineteen. So on January one, twenty nineteen,

0:25:46.640 --> 0:25:49.720
<v Speaker 1>any copyrighted works that were published in nineteen twenty three,

0:25:49.920 --> 0:25:52.480
<v Speaker 1>with a few exceptions that have to do with music

0:25:52.520 --> 0:25:56.119
<v Speaker 1>because music is complicated. Otherwise, they entered the public domain

0:25:56.160 --> 0:25:58.760
<v Speaker 1>at that point. This was the first time in twenty

0:25:58.800 --> 0:26:01.880
<v Speaker 1>one years in a large collection of works fell out

0:26:01.880 --> 0:26:05.520
<v Speaker 1>of copyright protection and into the public domain, only because

0:26:05.640 --> 0:26:08.159
<v Speaker 1>of the timing of changes to copyright law in the

0:26:08.240 --> 0:26:12.040
<v Speaker 1>United States. So works from nineteen twenty two had entered

0:26:12.080 --> 0:26:15.840
<v Speaker 1>the public domain back in nineteen, but then you had

0:26:15.840 --> 0:26:18.520
<v Speaker 1>the change to copyright law, and so any works from

0:26:18.600 --> 0:26:21.919
<v Speaker 1>nineteen twenty three enjoyed twenty more years of protection because

0:26:21.960 --> 0:26:24.760
<v Speaker 1>of that recent extension, and thus they only entered the

0:26:24.760 --> 0:26:27.639
<v Speaker 1>public domain in twenty nineteen. That's the difference that a

0:26:27.720 --> 0:26:32.160
<v Speaker 1>single year can make. This year in one we saw

0:26:32.240 --> 0:26:35.880
<v Speaker 1>works like f Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby go into

0:26:35.920 --> 0:26:38.680
<v Speaker 1>the public domain. You can now make as many copies

0:26:38.680 --> 0:26:41.240
<v Speaker 1>of The Great Gatsby as you like. You can hand

0:26:41.280 --> 0:26:43.239
<v Speaker 1>them out for free, you could charge for them if

0:26:43.280 --> 0:26:47.800
<v Speaker 1>you want to. It's public domain. Dr Doolittle's Zoo also

0:26:47.800 --> 0:26:50.879
<v Speaker 1>went into public domain this year. Agatha Christie's The Secret

0:26:50.920 --> 0:26:55.359
<v Speaker 1>of Chimneys made its exit from copyright protection. The nineteen

0:26:55.400 --> 0:26:59.080
<v Speaker 1>twenty five silent film version of been Her, not the

0:26:59.200 --> 0:27:02.639
<v Speaker 1>Charlton Heston version, but the silent film version is in

0:27:02.680 --> 0:27:06.240
<v Speaker 1>public domain, as is lawn cheneye The Phantom of the Opera.

0:27:07.080 --> 0:27:10.159
<v Speaker 1>Also the silent film version of Wizard Oz. Again not

0:27:10.320 --> 0:27:15.159
<v Speaker 1>the big musical version, you know, not the follow the

0:27:15.240 --> 0:27:17.920
<v Speaker 1>Yellow Brick Road version, but the silent film version of

0:27:17.960 --> 0:27:20.480
<v Speaker 1>Wizard of Oz is also in the public domain this year.

0:27:20.880 --> 0:27:23.080
<v Speaker 1>Now that means that if you want to make copies

0:27:23.160 --> 0:27:25.200
<v Speaker 1>of lawn Chenese Phantom of the Opera and you want

0:27:25.200 --> 0:27:27.840
<v Speaker 1>to distribute those widely, if you want to post the

0:27:28.040 --> 0:27:31.600
<v Speaker 1>entire movie on YouTube, you can. You can do it

0:27:31.800 --> 0:27:37.399
<v Speaker 1>for free. You could also, you know, sell DVDs of

0:27:37.440 --> 0:27:39.359
<v Speaker 1>it if you wanted to. You could. You could have

0:27:39.480 --> 0:27:43.159
<v Speaker 1>press DVDs with Lawn Cheney's Phantom of the Opera and

0:27:43.359 --> 0:27:45.960
<v Speaker 1>you could sell them. I don't know if anyone would

0:27:46.000 --> 0:27:48.280
<v Speaker 1>buy them, but you could do it. You can do

0:27:48.320 --> 0:27:49.600
<v Speaker 1>it here, you can do it there, you can do

0:27:49.680 --> 0:27:53.280
<v Speaker 1>it everywhere in the US. Anyway, it is no longer

0:27:53.400 --> 0:27:57.560
<v Speaker 1>in copyright. Now, backtracking just a little bit, the printing

0:27:57.600 --> 0:28:00.720
<v Speaker 1>press had made copyright protection more or less a necessity

0:28:00.800 --> 0:28:04.520
<v Speaker 1>to prevent publishers from pouncing on each other and flooding

0:28:04.560 --> 0:28:07.760
<v Speaker 1>the market with copies of various books. But for a

0:28:07.840 --> 0:28:11.240
<v Speaker 1>really long time, copyright was just something that big companies

0:28:11.280 --> 0:28:14.560
<v Speaker 1>were mostly concerned with. It was a non factor for

0:28:14.600 --> 0:28:17.680
<v Speaker 1>the average person. I mean, it affected us, but we

0:28:17.760 --> 0:28:21.800
<v Speaker 1>didn't come into any sort of conflict with copyright protection

0:28:22.200 --> 0:28:25.000
<v Speaker 1>because most of us just didn't have access to equipment

0:28:25.200 --> 0:28:28.880
<v Speaker 1>that we would need to replicate an original work. If

0:28:28.920 --> 0:28:31.480
<v Speaker 1>back in the mid nineteen twenties you managed to get

0:28:31.480 --> 0:28:34.240
<v Speaker 1>your grubby hands on a copy of The Great Gatsby,

0:28:34.400 --> 0:28:37.560
<v Speaker 1>you probably didn't have the ability to copy that work

0:28:37.600 --> 0:28:40.040
<v Speaker 1>and then sell it to two people yourself, you know,

0:28:40.080 --> 0:28:46.280
<v Speaker 1>like undercutting big bookstores or whatever. Publishing houses were protecting themselves,

0:28:46.320 --> 0:28:49.680
<v Speaker 1>but they were doing so mostly from other publishing houses.

0:28:50.080 --> 0:28:52.760
<v Speaker 1>The average person was not a threat. So the nature

0:28:52.800 --> 0:28:57.360
<v Speaker 1>of copyright law was all about corporate entities protecting themselves

0:28:57.440 --> 0:29:01.440
<v Speaker 1>from each other. This, by the a is what kind

0:29:01.480 --> 0:29:04.920
<v Speaker 1>of becomes an issue in the modern day, where you've

0:29:04.960 --> 0:29:08.560
<v Speaker 1>got the the effect of like a nuclear arsenal, you know,

0:29:08.640 --> 0:29:11.920
<v Speaker 1>corporations against each other that could then be aimed against

0:29:11.960 --> 0:29:17.360
<v Speaker 1>the individual because the nature of copying has changed, so

0:29:18.000 --> 0:29:23.360
<v Speaker 1>there's a disproportionate hardship on the individual because of that.

0:29:24.200 --> 0:29:27.600
<v Speaker 1>So over time, various inventions meant more people would have

0:29:27.640 --> 0:29:31.720
<v Speaker 1>the ability to create copies of stuff, and these technological

0:29:31.760 --> 0:29:36.240
<v Speaker 1>advancements always came hand in hand with media companies freaking

0:29:36.320 --> 0:29:39.440
<v Speaker 1>the heck out about it, which is not an exaggeration.

0:29:39.880 --> 0:29:44.240
<v Speaker 1>The invention of technologies like cassette tapes or VHS tapes,

0:29:44.880 --> 0:29:49.520
<v Speaker 1>burnable compact discs, and of course digital media all sent

0:29:49.840 --> 0:29:54.400
<v Speaker 1>media companies into a tizzy. Each invention prompted the companies

0:29:54.400 --> 0:29:58.840
<v Speaker 1>to object strenuously and to proclaim that should these technologies

0:29:58.880 --> 0:30:03.280
<v Speaker 1>fall into the uh hands of the common unwashed masses

0:30:03.400 --> 0:30:07.080
<v Speaker 1>like myself, that the era of stuff like film or

0:30:07.200 --> 0:30:10.840
<v Speaker 1>television or popular music would all come to an end

0:30:10.880 --> 0:30:14.640
<v Speaker 1>and the entire industry would crash down on itself and

0:30:15.240 --> 0:30:18.800
<v Speaker 1>we would then be back to banging rocks together for entertainment.

0:30:19.360 --> 0:30:22.880
<v Speaker 1>News Alert. None of that happened, but in the process

0:30:22.920 --> 0:30:26.880
<v Speaker 1>we saw lots of other laws passed that expanded copyright

0:30:26.920 --> 0:30:31.560
<v Speaker 1>protection by creating a pretty extensive framework for prosecution should

0:30:31.560 --> 0:30:35.400
<v Speaker 1>an IP holder discover that someone has copied or distributed

0:30:35.840 --> 0:30:39.680
<v Speaker 1>stuff that they hold the rights to without proper authorization.

0:30:40.320 --> 0:30:44.440
<v Speaker 1>I will cover more of those in the next episode. Now,

0:30:44.560 --> 0:30:48.160
<v Speaker 1>one of the reasons the public domain is important is

0:30:48.200 --> 0:30:50.800
<v Speaker 1>that works can have a great deal of relevance and

0:30:50.920 --> 0:30:55.640
<v Speaker 1>usefulness many years after they were published. Think of all

0:30:55.720 --> 0:30:58.280
<v Speaker 1>the classics that are out there that have stood the

0:30:58.320 --> 0:31:02.880
<v Speaker 1>test of time. But if copyright lasted forever, these works

0:31:02.880 --> 0:31:06.840
<v Speaker 1>would be under a tight restriction in perpetuity. Public domain

0:31:06.880 --> 0:31:11.840
<v Speaker 1>means that eventually these works will become widely accessible. It's

0:31:11.840 --> 0:31:14.280
<v Speaker 1>balancing out the benefits that go to the I P

0:31:14.480 --> 0:31:19.200
<v Speaker 1>holder against the benefits of society as a whole. All right,

0:31:19.280 --> 0:31:23.880
<v Speaker 1>but what about fair use? Okay? So, fair use is

0:31:23.880 --> 0:31:27.680
<v Speaker 1>a concept that allows someone to use part of a

0:31:27.800 --> 0:31:34.280
<v Speaker 1>copyrighted work that uh without permission in one of several ways.

0:31:34.680 --> 0:31:39.160
<v Speaker 1>And it's fairly narrow in its scope, but also kind

0:31:39.200 --> 0:31:41.680
<v Speaker 1>of fuzzy at the edges. So it's narrow in scope,

0:31:42.040 --> 0:31:44.920
<v Speaker 1>but there are no hard yes or no answers to

0:31:45.000 --> 0:31:47.880
<v Speaker 1>this stuff. In general, fair use allows someone to make

0:31:48.040 --> 0:31:51.560
<v Speaker 1>limited use of a portion of a copyrighted work for

0:31:51.680 --> 0:31:57.800
<v Speaker 1>the purposes of news reporting, research, teaching, or criticism and commentary.

0:31:58.160 --> 0:32:01.520
<v Speaker 1>Parody falls into that last category. As well, But we're

0:32:01.520 --> 0:32:04.320
<v Speaker 1>gonna come back to that because it's a more specific

0:32:04.760 --> 0:32:09.360
<v Speaker 1>approach than just adding funny words to existing music. Fair

0:32:09.480 --> 0:32:12.480
<v Speaker 1>use means that you don't have to secure permission from

0:32:12.520 --> 0:32:15.840
<v Speaker 1>the copyright holder if you're using a small portion of

0:32:15.880 --> 0:32:19.360
<v Speaker 1>that original work in one of these ways. So, for example,

0:32:19.600 --> 0:32:23.040
<v Speaker 1>if I were criticizing a film, I could use small

0:32:23.040 --> 0:32:26.280
<v Speaker 1>clips of that film during my critique. Let's say I'm

0:32:26.320 --> 0:32:29.400
<v Speaker 1>uploading a video to YouTube where I am critiquing a movie.

0:32:29.880 --> 0:32:32.560
<v Speaker 1>I can include tiny clips of that film in order

0:32:32.640 --> 0:32:36.560
<v Speaker 1>to illustrate specific points of my criticism, and I wouldn't

0:32:36.600 --> 0:32:40.480
<v Speaker 1>have to get permission first. The clips I used would

0:32:40.640 --> 0:32:44.640
<v Speaker 1>need to relate directly to that criticism. However, I might

0:32:44.680 --> 0:32:48.080
<v Speaker 1>want to talk about lighting composition, and I'll use clips

0:32:48.120 --> 0:32:52.720
<v Speaker 1>from Robert Egger's film The Lighthouse, because that film had

0:32:52.840 --> 0:32:55.960
<v Speaker 1>phenomenal lighting in it. So I'd use those examples to

0:32:55.960 --> 0:32:59.880
<v Speaker 1>talk about specific lighting techniques and how they shape storytelling

0:33:00.000 --> 0:33:04.680
<v Speaker 1>and what significance they play in the unfolding of the

0:33:04.720 --> 0:33:07.160
<v Speaker 1>story of the Lighthouse. But if I were to get

0:33:07.160 --> 0:33:10.320
<v Speaker 1>more loosey goosey, my protection of fair use would not

0:33:10.600 --> 0:33:14.640
<v Speaker 1>be as solid. Similarly, if I were to use very

0:33:14.720 --> 0:33:18.200
<v Speaker 1>short clips of the film in my critique. My argument

0:33:18.200 --> 0:33:20.400
<v Speaker 1>of fair use is better supported then if I were

0:33:20.480 --> 0:33:24.600
<v Speaker 1>to say, include thirty minutes of the movie surrounded by

0:33:24.640 --> 0:33:28.320
<v Speaker 1>like five minutes of criticism. Now, does that mean there's

0:33:28.360 --> 0:33:31.560
<v Speaker 1>a specific safe amount of copyrighted material that you can

0:33:31.640 --> 0:33:36.240
<v Speaker 1>use without fear of retribution. No. There is a common

0:33:36.280 --> 0:33:40.360
<v Speaker 1>misconception that if you use less than say, fifteen seconds

0:33:40.360 --> 0:33:44.520
<v Speaker 1>of audio from a source or six seconds or whatever,

0:33:44.920 --> 0:33:47.040
<v Speaker 1>that that's small enough to be fair use and no

0:33:47.040 --> 0:33:49.680
<v Speaker 1>one's going to come after you. That is just not true.

0:33:50.040 --> 0:33:53.160
<v Speaker 1>Or rather, it's it's not a guarantee. Specifically, it's not

0:33:53.200 --> 0:33:56.560
<v Speaker 1>a guarantee if you're not using that as some form

0:33:56.600 --> 0:34:00.440
<v Speaker 1>of commentary or criticism on the work itself. If you're

0:34:00.480 --> 0:34:04.840
<v Speaker 1>using it as like the button to a moment, you know,

0:34:04.920 --> 0:34:09.360
<v Speaker 1>like a sound bite or whatever, there's very little support

0:34:09.400 --> 0:34:11.520
<v Speaker 1>for a fair use argument there. So if I just

0:34:11.600 --> 0:34:15.240
<v Speaker 1>filled up this podcast with sound bites from various films

0:34:15.320 --> 0:34:19.080
<v Speaker 1>and music, TV shows and radio spots and stuff like

0:34:19.120 --> 0:34:22.560
<v Speaker 1>that without paying a license for all of those things,

0:34:23.560 --> 0:34:26.280
<v Speaker 1>I would be flying pretty darn close to the sun,

0:34:27.040 --> 0:34:31.120
<v Speaker 1>because unless I'm using those snippets in very specific ways

0:34:31.520 --> 0:34:35.240
<v Speaker 1>such as to criticize those original works that the snippets

0:34:35.320 --> 0:34:40.040
<v Speaker 1>belong to, or to report on the news of those snippets, Well,

0:34:40.080 --> 0:34:44.040
<v Speaker 1>I would be infringing on copyright. That doesn't necessarily mean

0:34:44.080 --> 0:34:47.200
<v Speaker 1>anyone is going to come after me. I mean, chances

0:34:47.200 --> 0:34:51.080
<v Speaker 1>are for really small stuff, I'd probably be okay unless

0:34:51.120 --> 0:34:54.719
<v Speaker 1>my podcast got wildly successful, in which case I could

0:34:54.760 --> 0:34:58.480
<v Speaker 1>represent a pretty lucrative target. If the copyright holders looked

0:34:58.520 --> 0:35:01.560
<v Speaker 1>at my podcast and said, well, that show is making

0:35:01.880 --> 0:35:04.960
<v Speaker 1>x million dollars a year, and a lot of that

0:35:05.200 --> 0:35:08.600
<v Speaker 1>popularity we could argue comes from its use of our

0:35:08.840 --> 0:35:11.799
<v Speaker 1>intellectual property. We can get a piece of that that

0:35:11.920 --> 0:35:14.640
<v Speaker 1>pie like that. That would be the thought process, and

0:35:14.800 --> 0:35:18.640
<v Speaker 1>it could actually work in court. So it doesn't mean

0:35:18.680 --> 0:35:22.799
<v Speaker 1>I'm bulletproof if I'm just using tiny little clips. It's

0:35:22.840 --> 0:35:25.200
<v Speaker 1>not until it goes to court that I really know

0:35:25.760 --> 0:35:27.719
<v Speaker 1>if I'm going to have to pay or not. So

0:35:27.800 --> 0:35:31.960
<v Speaker 1>fair use isn't a concept that has hard borders to it.

0:35:31.960 --> 0:35:35.480
<v Speaker 1>It's all interpretive stuff. And here's the key to all

0:35:35.520 --> 0:35:39.600
<v Speaker 1>of it. Fair use is something that gets determined in court. So,

0:35:39.640 --> 0:35:43.560
<v Speaker 1>in other words, you can't really use fair use proactively

0:35:43.600 --> 0:35:46.759
<v Speaker 1>as a defense. It's a defense that you make if

0:35:46.880 --> 0:35:50.879
<v Speaker 1>a copyright holder pursues a claim against you for copyright infringement.

0:35:51.520 --> 0:35:53.719
<v Speaker 1>So let's say that I did that critique of the

0:35:53.880 --> 0:35:58.200
<v Speaker 1>Lighthouse and the film company A twenty four which released

0:35:58.239 --> 0:36:00.560
<v Speaker 1>and distributed the film here in the unit it states.

0:36:00.880 --> 0:36:03.840
<v Speaker 1>Let's say that that that company came after me for

0:36:03.960 --> 0:36:07.439
<v Speaker 1>copyright infringement, and I would have to defend my use

0:36:08.160 --> 0:36:10.760
<v Speaker 1>of those clips in court, and I would have to

0:36:10.800 --> 0:36:14.840
<v Speaker 1>cite fair use in that process. Throughout the court proceedings,

0:36:14.840 --> 0:36:17.400
<v Speaker 1>I would likely have to prove that the way I

0:36:17.480 --> 0:36:20.320
<v Speaker 1>use those clips was in fact to critique the film,

0:36:20.760 --> 0:36:23.839
<v Speaker 1>and that the excerpts I used were appropriate and constituted

0:36:23.880 --> 0:36:28.160
<v Speaker 1>a relatively small percentage of the overall critique and a

0:36:28.280 --> 0:36:32.440
<v Speaker 1>very small percentage of the original film. Courts decide on

0:36:32.480 --> 0:36:35.759
<v Speaker 1>a case by case basis if a particular instance is

0:36:35.800 --> 0:36:40.080
<v Speaker 1>fair use or not. There isn't a blanket fair use defense.

0:36:40.840 --> 0:36:42.640
<v Speaker 1>You gotta go in front of the courts to do it.

0:36:42.719 --> 0:36:45.160
<v Speaker 1>And this is what I meant by that nuclear arsenal.

0:36:45.560 --> 0:36:48.880
<v Speaker 1>When it comes to companies versus companies, typically you have

0:36:49.080 --> 0:36:54.040
<v Speaker 1>lawyers on both sides who are just perpetually employed by

0:36:54.080 --> 0:36:56.879
<v Speaker 1>these companies that call each other up and they work

0:36:56.960 --> 0:36:59.799
<v Speaker 1>things out, and you might have a licensing agreement or

0:36:59.800 --> 0:37:03.000
<v Speaker 1>you I agree to a settlement, but it rarely goes

0:37:03.080 --> 0:37:07.239
<v Speaker 1>to court. When it comes to individuals. Most of us

0:37:07.320 --> 0:37:11.240
<v Speaker 1>don't have access to that kind of legal defense. So

0:37:11.760 --> 0:37:16.120
<v Speaker 1>for us, it's like a massive, well funded company with

0:37:16.520 --> 0:37:20.879
<v Speaker 1>high paid lawyers versus the little guy, and it means

0:37:20.920 --> 0:37:23.359
<v Speaker 1>that the little guy has to shell out the big

0:37:23.400 --> 0:37:27.640
<v Speaker 1>bucks in order to defend themselves against the corporations. Even

0:37:27.680 --> 0:37:31.319
<v Speaker 1>if the little guy is totally in the right. If

0:37:31.440 --> 0:37:36.440
<v Speaker 1>the the use is inarguably fair use, you don't get

0:37:36.440 --> 0:37:38.680
<v Speaker 1>to that decision magically. You have to go to court

0:37:38.719 --> 0:37:42.760
<v Speaker 1>for it, and court is expensive. We're going to pause

0:37:42.800 --> 0:37:46.000
<v Speaker 1>the conversation right here, take a quick break, and we'll

0:37:46.040 --> 0:37:55.839
<v Speaker 1>be right back now. The courts tend to look at

0:37:55.960 --> 0:38:00.520
<v Speaker 1>four factors when deciding if any given instance come institute's

0:38:00.560 --> 0:38:04.560
<v Speaker 1>fair use. One is the purpose and character of the

0:38:04.640 --> 0:38:08.239
<v Speaker 1>use of the original material, including whether the use is

0:38:08.320 --> 0:38:13.000
<v Speaker 1>for a commercial nature or is nonprofit and educational. So,

0:38:13.000 --> 0:38:16.240
<v Speaker 1>in other words, if I'm making videos where I critique films,

0:38:16.440 --> 0:38:18.880
<v Speaker 1>and I include clips of those films in the videos,

0:38:19.440 --> 0:38:24.160
<v Speaker 1>and I'm monetizing those critique videos, that can be a

0:38:24.200 --> 0:38:26.920
<v Speaker 1>little bit of a strike against me because I'm using

0:38:26.960 --> 0:38:30.560
<v Speaker 1>someone else's work in something on my own in order

0:38:30.600 --> 0:38:33.880
<v Speaker 1>to make money. That's not a failure rail the gate,

0:38:34.280 --> 0:38:37.600
<v Speaker 1>but it does make my argument harder. So it doesn't

0:38:37.600 --> 0:38:40.120
<v Speaker 1>mean that a court is going to decide I'm not

0:38:40.920 --> 0:38:43.759
<v Speaker 1>engaging in fair use. But in general, if the use

0:38:43.880 --> 0:38:48.120
<v Speaker 1>is nonprofit and it's educational, it fits more easily into

0:38:48.120 --> 0:38:50.480
<v Speaker 1>the fair use category, and courts tend to be a

0:38:50.520 --> 0:38:54.239
<v Speaker 1>bit more forgiving. Then there's the nature of the copyrighted

0:38:54.239 --> 0:38:57.440
<v Speaker 1>work itself. In general, it is easier to make a

0:38:57.440 --> 0:39:00.880
<v Speaker 1>fair use argument if the thing you're sampling rum is

0:39:00.920 --> 0:39:04.920
<v Speaker 1>a non fictional work. Works that are about creative expression,

0:39:05.080 --> 0:39:08.680
<v Speaker 1>like novels or movies, have a higher burden of proof

0:39:09.320 --> 0:39:13.320
<v Speaker 1>than works that are nonfiction. So, for example, in this podcast,

0:39:13.440 --> 0:39:18.400
<v Speaker 1>I will sometimes quote specific sources those are nonfiction sources,

0:39:18.440 --> 0:39:22.120
<v Speaker 1>and I quote from them to establish facts. That's easier

0:39:22.160 --> 0:39:26.000
<v Speaker 1>to defend as fair use than if I were to include,

0:39:26.200 --> 0:39:29.560
<v Speaker 1>say a minute long audio clip from a science fiction

0:39:29.640 --> 0:39:31.920
<v Speaker 1>television show that's a work of fiction. It's a work

0:39:31.960 --> 0:39:36.040
<v Speaker 1>of creative endeavors that is harder to justify as fair

0:39:36.120 --> 0:39:41.280
<v Speaker 1>use unless I'm specifically critiquing the show itself. Then comes

0:39:41.640 --> 0:39:45.279
<v Speaker 1>the amount and substantiality of the portion of the copyrighted

0:39:45.320 --> 0:39:48.440
<v Speaker 1>work that I used in my critique of The Lighthouse.

0:39:48.520 --> 0:39:52.239
<v Speaker 1>If I'm using very short clips that just show up

0:39:52.239 --> 0:39:54.520
<v Speaker 1>in my video for like five or ten seconds each

0:39:54.600 --> 0:39:57.880
<v Speaker 1>as I talk about lighting techniques, that's easier to defend

0:39:57.960 --> 0:40:00.359
<v Speaker 1>as fair use. I'm not showing a signific get part

0:40:00.400 --> 0:40:02.560
<v Speaker 1>of the movie. People aren't going to feel like they

0:40:02.600 --> 0:40:05.880
<v Speaker 1>saw the entire film by watching my critique. They're just

0:40:05.960 --> 0:40:09.160
<v Speaker 1>getting a flavor of what I'm talking about and getting

0:40:09.160 --> 0:40:11.799
<v Speaker 1>an understanding of what I mean when I'm critiquing the

0:40:11.920 --> 0:40:15.920
<v Speaker 1>use of lighting. If I'm, however, using very long stretches

0:40:15.960 --> 0:40:20.680
<v Speaker 1>of the original film, particularly stretches that don't include changes

0:40:20.719 --> 0:40:23.480
<v Speaker 1>in lighting, well that's going to be a lot harder

0:40:23.680 --> 0:40:27.880
<v Speaker 1>to defend in court. And then there's the effect of

0:40:27.920 --> 0:40:31.520
<v Speaker 1>the use upon the potential market for the copyrighted work.

0:40:32.000 --> 0:40:35.520
<v Speaker 1>If my derivative work could possibly hurt the sales of

0:40:35.520 --> 0:40:40.560
<v Speaker 1>the original by displacing the sales of that original, that's

0:40:40.560 --> 0:40:43.640
<v Speaker 1>a problem. And this one is a tricky one, right

0:40:43.760 --> 0:40:47.320
<v Speaker 1>because what if I'm not critiquing the technique of a film,

0:40:47.560 --> 0:40:50.560
<v Speaker 1>but the quality of a film. And what if I

0:40:50.600 --> 0:40:53.840
<v Speaker 1>present a video where I do an extensive tear down

0:40:53.960 --> 0:40:57.239
<v Speaker 1>of a movie and I explain how I think it

0:40:57.360 --> 0:41:00.279
<v Speaker 1>is not a good film, or I'm arguing that people

0:41:00.320 --> 0:41:02.560
<v Speaker 1>shouldn't go see that movie, that it would be a

0:41:02.560 --> 0:41:05.800
<v Speaker 1>waste of their time and money. Well, if folks value

0:41:05.800 --> 0:41:08.840
<v Speaker 1>my judgment, I could well be said to have a

0:41:08.880 --> 0:41:12.120
<v Speaker 1>negative impact on the sales of the original work. However,

0:41:12.360 --> 0:41:16.120
<v Speaker 1>generally that would still be protected. However, if I were

0:41:16.160 --> 0:41:18.480
<v Speaker 1>to use the original in some way that would make

0:41:18.520 --> 0:41:22.279
<v Speaker 1>people want to buy my derivative work or consume it

0:41:22.360 --> 0:41:26.479
<v Speaker 1>for free or whatever instead of the original, well that's

0:41:26.480 --> 0:41:28.880
<v Speaker 1>harder to defend. So let's say, like in my critique

0:41:28.880 --> 0:41:31.319
<v Speaker 1>of The Lighthouse, I included the entire film of The

0:41:31.400 --> 0:41:35.520
<v Speaker 1>Lighthouse in my critique. That would be very hard to defend,

0:41:35.560 --> 0:41:38.080
<v Speaker 1>not just because I'm using a substantial amount of the

0:41:38.080 --> 0:41:42.520
<v Speaker 1>original work, but also the company did argue, Hey, why

0:41:42.600 --> 0:41:45.839
<v Speaker 1>would people pay to see our movie if they can

0:41:45.840 --> 0:41:49.200
<v Speaker 1>see it for free? Just wrapped up in the context

0:41:49.280 --> 0:41:52.960
<v Speaker 1>of this supposed criticism video, the copyright holder it can

0:41:52.960 --> 0:41:56.160
<v Speaker 1>make a valid claim that my derivative work would not

0:41:56.280 --> 0:41:59.840
<v Speaker 1>exist without the copyrighted original piece, and yet it was

0:41:59.880 --> 0:42:03.880
<v Speaker 1>a essentially siphoning sales away from that original piece that

0:42:04.040 --> 0:42:09.480
<v Speaker 1>is not protected under fair use. Okay, we've got that

0:42:09.520 --> 0:42:11.880
<v Speaker 1>all established. We're gonna make a couple more points before

0:42:11.920 --> 0:42:16.000
<v Speaker 1>we wrap this up. Um. So, when it comes to

0:42:16.040 --> 0:42:19.040
<v Speaker 1>stuff like music, I mentioned that you can copyright the

0:42:19.120 --> 0:42:23.520
<v Speaker 1>musical composition and you can copyright the lyrics separately. One

0:42:23.600 --> 0:42:28.080
<v Speaker 1>other thing you can do, however, is copyright individual performances

0:42:28.120 --> 0:42:31.520
<v Speaker 1>of a piece of music. So, for example, let's say

0:42:31.600 --> 0:42:33.680
<v Speaker 1>that you're making a video and you want to make

0:42:33.800 --> 0:42:37.399
<v Speaker 1>use of a recording of Beethoven's Ode to Joy. Now

0:42:37.640 --> 0:42:41.200
<v Speaker 1>to Joy is part of Beethoven's Symphony Number nine. Beethoven

0:42:41.280 --> 0:42:44.320
<v Speaker 1>composed that in the eighteen twenties and it has long

0:42:44.360 --> 0:42:48.080
<v Speaker 1>since passed into the public domain. You can use Ode

0:42:48.120 --> 0:42:52.319
<v Speaker 1>to Joy in anything you like for free. There's no

0:42:52.360 --> 0:42:55.799
<v Speaker 1>one to pay royalties to as far as that's concerned,

0:42:56.680 --> 0:43:01.000
<v Speaker 1>or licensing fees. Two. However, that just covers the music itself.

0:43:01.360 --> 0:43:05.719
<v Speaker 1>A performance of Oh to Joy will have its own copyright,

0:43:05.800 --> 0:43:10.080
<v Speaker 1>which dates to the recording of that piece. So even

0:43:10.080 --> 0:43:14.280
<v Speaker 1>though the music is in public domain, a performance likely

0:43:14.520 --> 0:43:17.160
<v Speaker 1>is not. Unless you're using a performance of Oh to

0:43:17.239 --> 0:43:21.120
<v Speaker 1>Joy the dates from before the nineteen twenties, So you

0:43:21.200 --> 0:43:25.480
<v Speaker 1>could perform to Joy yourself in your project, you'd be

0:43:25.480 --> 0:43:27.880
<v Speaker 1>good to go. The music is in the public domain,

0:43:28.080 --> 0:43:32.920
<v Speaker 1>the performance is yours. You're fine. But if you wanted to, say,

0:43:33.600 --> 0:43:37.480
<v Speaker 1>use a recording of the London Philharmonic's performance that they

0:43:37.520 --> 0:43:40.920
<v Speaker 1>did sometime in the nineteen nineties of Oh Joy, well,

0:43:40.960 --> 0:43:43.200
<v Speaker 1>then you would have to deal with some licensing arrangements

0:43:43.200 --> 0:43:46.000
<v Speaker 1>to get the proper permissions to make use of that music.

0:43:46.120 --> 0:43:50.120
<v Speaker 1>Because while the musics in the public domain, the performance

0:43:50.320 --> 0:43:53.040
<v Speaker 1>is not. Then there are other things to consider as well.

0:43:53.200 --> 0:43:56.120
<v Speaker 1>So remember when I said parody is kind of a

0:43:56.160 --> 0:43:59.480
<v Speaker 1>special case with fair use. This one gets even more

0:43:59.480 --> 0:44:04.680
<v Speaker 1>accomplish catd than other forms. So technically parody falls under

0:44:04.680 --> 0:44:08.240
<v Speaker 1>fair use if it falls under the criticism and comment

0:44:08.520 --> 0:44:12.600
<v Speaker 1>consideration For fair use, A typical definition of parody is

0:44:12.760 --> 0:44:17.160
<v Speaker 1>quote and imitation of the style of a particular writer, artist,

0:44:17.320 --> 0:44:22.160
<v Speaker 1>or genre would deliberate exaggeration for comic effect end quote,

0:44:22.600 --> 0:44:25.600
<v Speaker 1>But that doesn't automatically mean that it's fair use. For

0:44:25.640 --> 0:44:29.600
<v Speaker 1>it to be fair use, that specific parody really needs

0:44:29.600 --> 0:44:34.279
<v Speaker 1>to comment upon or criticize the original work that it

0:44:34.440 --> 0:44:38.719
<v Speaker 1>is parodying. For that reason, some but not all, of

0:44:38.760 --> 0:44:43.520
<v Speaker 1>weird Al Yankovic's parody songs would easily fall under fair use,

0:44:43.560 --> 0:44:46.319
<v Speaker 1>and others would be questionable. Now, I mentioned weird Al

0:44:46.560 --> 0:44:49.239
<v Speaker 1>because he's the most famous parody artist I can think of,

0:44:49.360 --> 0:44:51.799
<v Speaker 1>that probably the one that most people have heard of,

0:44:52.280 --> 0:44:55.360
<v Speaker 1>and some of his parodies do tend to target the

0:44:55.440 --> 0:44:59.480
<v Speaker 1>original work. So Smells like Nirvana is a parody of

0:44:59.520 --> 0:45:02.319
<v Speaker 1>the nerv on a song smells like teen Spirit, and

0:45:02.360 --> 0:45:06.080
<v Speaker 1>it's all about critiquing the original song. There are lyrics

0:45:06.160 --> 0:45:09.239
<v Speaker 1>of what is this song all about? Can't figure any

0:45:09.320 --> 0:45:12.799
<v Speaker 1>lyrics out that comments on the lyrics of the original work.

0:45:13.120 --> 0:45:16.719
<v Speaker 1>Other verses poke fun at Kurt Cobain's slurring and mumbling

0:45:16.760 --> 0:45:19.720
<v Speaker 1>of words, making it hard to understand what is actually

0:45:19.800 --> 0:45:23.640
<v Speaker 1>being sung, So that song parody would probably hold up

0:45:23.760 --> 0:45:27.440
<v Speaker 1>under fair use. But then take a song like Foil.

0:45:28.080 --> 0:45:32.680
<v Speaker 1>Foil is a parody of Lord's song Royals, So it's

0:45:32.760 --> 0:45:36.560
<v Speaker 1>using the music and lyrical structure of Royals. You know,

0:45:36.600 --> 0:45:39.960
<v Speaker 1>they change the actual lyrics, but's the same rhyme scheme

0:45:40.000 --> 0:45:43.759
<v Speaker 1>and scanshion of Royals. But the song Foil isn't a

0:45:43.760 --> 0:45:49.040
<v Speaker 1>commentary on Royals. Instead, it's a comedic song about aluminum foil,

0:45:49.440 --> 0:45:51.560
<v Speaker 1>and I'm pretty sure you couldn't make an argument that

0:45:51.640 --> 0:45:55.880
<v Speaker 1>it's somehow commenting on the original work, which means that

0:45:55.920 --> 0:45:58.560
<v Speaker 1>would be harder to defend as fair use. It's not

0:45:58.600 --> 0:46:00.840
<v Speaker 1>a bad song, by the way. This isn't a commentary

0:46:00.920 --> 0:46:04.600
<v Speaker 1>on the quality of the parody, but rather whether it

0:46:04.640 --> 0:46:08.120
<v Speaker 1>would fall under the consideration of fair use or not. Now,

0:46:08.120 --> 0:46:10.600
<v Speaker 1>to be clear, weird Al makes it a practice to

0:46:10.640 --> 0:46:14.040
<v Speaker 1>get permission to do his parodies before he does them.

0:46:14.280 --> 0:46:18.120
<v Speaker 1>He licenses the songs. In cases like smells like Nirvana,

0:46:18.520 --> 0:46:21.719
<v Speaker 1>he might have been able to skip that step, or

0:46:21.840 --> 0:46:26.040
<v Speaker 1>more likely his music label would have if they were,

0:46:26.560 --> 0:46:29.319
<v Speaker 1>you know, willing to defend any lawsuits that came their

0:46:29.360 --> 0:46:32.640
<v Speaker 1>way as a result, But as both a courtesy and

0:46:32.760 --> 0:46:38.480
<v Speaker 1>kind of a necessity, he reaches out before recording parodies. Usually, um,

0:46:38.520 --> 0:46:40.880
<v Speaker 1>there's at least one version of this where things didn't

0:46:40.880 --> 0:46:42.920
<v Speaker 1>work out, though actually there's a couple I can think of,

0:46:42.960 --> 0:46:45.640
<v Speaker 1>but I'm gonna mention one in particular. So back in

0:46:45.680 --> 0:46:48.560
<v Speaker 1>two thousand six, weird Al Yankovic was working on an

0:46:48.560 --> 0:46:50.960
<v Speaker 1>album and he wanted to include a parody of the

0:46:51.080 --> 0:46:55.960
<v Speaker 1>James Blunt song You're Beautiful. Yankovic's version was a parody

0:46:56.040 --> 0:46:59.920
<v Speaker 1>called You're Pitiful about a middle aged dude who serious

0:47:00.120 --> 0:47:03.279
<v Speaker 1>down on his luck. Blunt was receptive and he gave

0:47:03.760 --> 0:47:08.879
<v Speaker 1>the go ahead to Yankovic, but as Yankovic's album neared publication,

0:47:09.200 --> 0:47:13.400
<v Speaker 1>Blunt's record label, Atlantic Records, reached out to Yankovic's label

0:47:13.560 --> 0:47:17.160
<v Speaker 1>and demanded that the song not appear on the album.

0:47:17.200 --> 0:47:20.279
<v Speaker 1>And you know, music labels typically hold the i P

0:47:21.040 --> 0:47:25.000
<v Speaker 1>for the actual songs of an artist. In this case

0:47:25.200 --> 0:47:28.640
<v Speaker 1>is a little more complicated than that. So getting permission

0:47:28.640 --> 0:47:32.800
<v Speaker 1>from Blunt, while a good thing, wasn't totally legally binding.

0:47:33.600 --> 0:47:37.560
<v Speaker 1>Blunt probably could have pushed back on Atlantic Records about this,

0:47:38.320 --> 0:47:40.239
<v Speaker 1>but that's not exactly an easy thing to do when

0:47:40.280 --> 0:47:42.160
<v Speaker 1>you're an artist. I mean, you you want to work

0:47:42.160 --> 0:47:44.279
<v Speaker 1>with your label. You don't want that to be a

0:47:44.360 --> 0:47:50.520
<v Speaker 1>confrontational relationship. And as I mentioned earlier, defending fair use

0:47:50.840 --> 0:47:54.160
<v Speaker 1>is expensive because it all goes to that consideration of

0:47:54.160 --> 0:47:57.200
<v Speaker 1>a court, and that means lawyers and lawyers have fees,

0:47:57.840 --> 0:48:00.600
<v Speaker 1>and so defending an instance as fair use in court

0:48:01.080 --> 0:48:05.080
<v Speaker 1>can mean that you're paying thousands or tens of thousands

0:48:05.160 --> 0:48:09.719
<v Speaker 1>of dollars in fees just to defend yourself. There's a

0:48:09.760 --> 0:48:14.880
<v Speaker 1>financial disincentive to the average person because again, these laws

0:48:15.239 --> 0:48:19.000
<v Speaker 1>were made with corporations in mind, big entities that can

0:48:19.040 --> 0:48:22.400
<v Speaker 1>afford these kind of things. The average person can't. So

0:48:22.480 --> 0:48:26.640
<v Speaker 1>corporations like music labels or publishers have you know, entire

0:48:26.719 --> 0:48:29.200
<v Speaker 1>teams of lawyers who do this stuff all the time.

0:48:29.480 --> 0:48:32.359
<v Speaker 1>They can put pressure on folks with threats of lawsuits.

0:48:32.640 --> 0:48:35.080
<v Speaker 1>And even if those folks are in the right, you know,

0:48:35.160 --> 0:48:38.839
<v Speaker 1>even if their works clearly would fall under fair use,

0:48:39.280 --> 0:48:42.799
<v Speaker 1>to defend it in court could be way too expensive

0:48:43.080 --> 0:48:46.080
<v Speaker 1>for these individuals to afford it. There have been cases

0:48:46.080 --> 0:48:49.400
<v Speaker 1>in which people have settled out of court for thousands

0:48:49.400 --> 0:48:52.279
<v Speaker 1>of dollars, not because they felt they were legit and

0:48:52.320 --> 0:48:54.960
<v Speaker 1>the wrong, but because trying to prove that they were

0:48:54.960 --> 0:48:58.960
<v Speaker 1>innocent of infringement was more expensive than settling. It's pretty

0:48:59.040 --> 0:49:02.800
<v Speaker 1>darn brutal. Now, what about all those posts and YouTube

0:49:02.840 --> 0:49:06.360
<v Speaker 1>videos that say no copyright infringement intended? Those are pretty

0:49:06.400 --> 0:49:09.520
<v Speaker 1>much worthless. It's akin to posting on Facebook that you

0:49:09.560 --> 0:49:12.439
<v Speaker 1>aren't giving Facebook the rights to your data. That's also

0:49:12.560 --> 0:49:15.440
<v Speaker 1>useless because just by signing on to Facebook, and making

0:49:15.440 --> 0:49:18.560
<v Speaker 1>an account, you have to agree to Facebook's terms of service.

0:49:18.920 --> 0:49:21.600
<v Speaker 1>That kind of supersedes your little post that says you're

0:49:21.640 --> 0:49:25.040
<v Speaker 1>not in favor of Facebook using your data. Facebook's responses

0:49:25.520 --> 0:49:27.960
<v Speaker 1>too bad, because you agreed to it by being on

0:49:28.000 --> 0:49:30.920
<v Speaker 1>the platform. Now that's part of our terms of service.

0:49:30.960 --> 0:49:34.040
<v Speaker 1>If you don't want us to take your data, don't

0:49:34.040 --> 0:49:36.640
<v Speaker 1>be on Facebook. That's kind of the way that works.

0:49:36.800 --> 0:49:38.640
<v Speaker 1>So if you come across a video that says no

0:49:38.760 --> 0:49:42.800
<v Speaker 1>copyright infringement intended, or a picture on Instagram that clearly

0:49:43.160 --> 0:49:46.279
<v Speaker 1>doesn't belong to the account that posted it, just know

0:49:46.440 --> 0:49:50.440
<v Speaker 1>that that phrase means nothing. Intent is not part of

0:49:50.480 --> 0:49:53.800
<v Speaker 1>determining whether someone is infringing copyright in the first place.

0:49:54.040 --> 0:49:58.040
<v Speaker 1>It doesn't matter what you intend. There's definitely a gradient

0:49:58.200 --> 0:50:01.160
<v Speaker 1>when it comes to copyright infringement. Like if I include

0:50:01.200 --> 0:50:04.799
<v Speaker 1>half of a music video online, that's copyright infringement. But

0:50:04.840 --> 0:50:08.120
<v Speaker 1>if I include the whole thing, that is worse. And

0:50:08.200 --> 0:50:11.040
<v Speaker 1>if I monetize the video where I do it, that's

0:50:11.080 --> 0:50:14.919
<v Speaker 1>even worse. But even that smallest first example I gave

0:50:15.040 --> 0:50:18.000
<v Speaker 1>is still infringing. Doesn't matter whether I think it is

0:50:18.120 --> 0:50:21.520
<v Speaker 1>or not. You know, if I can think something's not

0:50:21.600 --> 0:50:24.080
<v Speaker 1>a crime, but if legally it's a crime, it doesn't

0:50:24.080 --> 0:50:26.600
<v Speaker 1>really matter what I think. There are a lot of

0:50:26.640 --> 0:50:28.319
<v Speaker 1>other things I need to say about this, but one

0:50:28.360 --> 0:50:30.320
<v Speaker 1>thing I want to sum up with right here before

0:50:30.320 --> 0:50:32.880
<v Speaker 1>I close out, and we will pick back up in

0:50:32.920 --> 0:50:36.360
<v Speaker 1>the next episode, is that Tom Scott did a great

0:50:36.480 --> 0:50:39.719
<v Speaker 1>job exploring the issues of copyright and YouTube in particular,

0:50:40.000 --> 0:50:42.040
<v Speaker 1>and I'll look more at YouTube in the next episode.

0:50:42.560 --> 0:50:46.760
<v Speaker 1>He did in a video titled YouTube's Copyright System Isn't Broken?

0:50:47.040 --> 0:50:50.319
<v Speaker 1>The World's is and shout out to listener Kat, who

0:50:50.400 --> 0:50:53.200
<v Speaker 1>first turned me onto Tom Scott's videos. Scott does what

0:50:53.280 --> 0:50:56.040
<v Speaker 1>I do, only he does it with a British accent,

0:50:56.200 --> 0:50:58.959
<v Speaker 1>so he's better at it than I am by default. Also,

0:50:59.040 --> 0:51:02.319
<v Speaker 1>he's genuinely good at explaining stuff like this, so make

0:51:02.320 --> 0:51:04.600
<v Speaker 1>sure you check that out. And we'll come back to

0:51:04.680 --> 0:51:08.400
<v Speaker 1>talk more about YouTube and copyright infringement and content i

0:51:08.520 --> 0:51:10.520
<v Speaker 1>D and some of the laws that have been passed

0:51:11.080 --> 0:51:14.760
<v Speaker 1>after big media companies have lobbied Congress in the United

0:51:14.760 --> 0:51:18.600
<v Speaker 1>States that have changed the way information gets shared on

0:51:18.600 --> 0:51:22.279
<v Speaker 1>the Internet. We'll also talk about some of the crazy

0:51:22.480 --> 0:51:25.720
<v Speaker 1>movements that companies have made against individuals and an effort

0:51:25.760 --> 0:51:29.200
<v Speaker 1>to crack down on things like piracy, because all this

0:51:29.280 --> 0:51:32.520
<v Speaker 1>is tied up together and it's all a mess. And really,

0:51:32.520 --> 0:51:35.080
<v Speaker 1>what it boils down to is that copyright law itself

0:51:35.239 --> 0:51:41.319
<v Speaker 1>is in dire need of a full rewrite. But that's

0:51:41.400 --> 0:51:45.080
<v Speaker 1>dangerous because the parties that are particularly interested in a

0:51:45.120 --> 0:51:48.359
<v Speaker 1>rewrite of copyright law are not looking to make it better.

0:51:48.760 --> 0:51:52.960
<v Speaker 1>They're looking to make it last longer. That's it for

0:51:52.960 --> 0:51:55.759
<v Speaker 1>this episode. Later this week, we'll pick back up with

0:51:55.800 --> 0:52:00.279
<v Speaker 1>more about copyright, fair use and piracy and things of

0:52:00.280 --> 0:52:04.080
<v Speaker 1>that nature and talk about the problems that technology have

0:52:04.320 --> 0:52:07.160
<v Speaker 1>created for companies as well as the problems companies have

0:52:07.800 --> 0:52:12.200
<v Speaker 1>placed upon people and more so. I hope you enjoyed this.

0:52:12.280 --> 0:52:14.960
<v Speaker 1>You have any requests for things I should cover in

0:52:15.040 --> 0:52:17.640
<v Speaker 1>future episodes of tech Stuff, reach out to me on Twitter.

0:52:17.960 --> 0:52:20.400
<v Speaker 1>The handle for the show is text Stuff H s

0:52:20.600 --> 0:52:29.759
<v Speaker 1>W and I'll talk to you again really soon. Tex

0:52:29.840 --> 0:52:33.279
<v Speaker 1>Stuff is an I Heart Radio production. For more podcasts

0:52:33.320 --> 0:52:36.040
<v Speaker 1>from my Heart Radio, visit the I Heart Radio app,

0:52:36.200 --> 0:52:39.360
<v Speaker 1>Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.