"At issue for Malkin was a video podcast (video downloaded from the Internet) in
which she criticized the rap-music artist Akon, using excerpts from his music
videos and from a performance in which he performed a sexually explicit dance
with an underage girl. Pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA),
UMG, the corporation that represents Akon, gave YouTube notice that it believed
that postings of the podcast violated its copyrights, and thus must be
de-posted. But Malkin -- represented by the Electronic Frontier Foundation --
strongly disagreed, claiming 'fair use,' and arguing that UMG and Akon's true
motive was not to protect creative work, but to avoid harsh criticism.
Yesterday, UMG backed off by rescinding its takedown request. After YouTube got
the word, it allowed the podcast to be posted and viewed.
Hilton,
meanwhile, has been sued by several photograph agencies, including the prominent
X17, for posting copies of their photographs on his site. His attorney, Bryan
Freedman, claims, however, that because Hilton writes words on, and/or
embellishes, the photographs using white pen before he posts them, his use of
the photographs is 'satire,' and thus 'fair use.'
In this column, I'll
explain why Malkin prevailed, and Hilton probably will not. "
This does a great job of explaining fair use, and detailing how it worked to defend Malkin but will work to defeat Hilton.
No comments:
Post a Comment