You have to make a distinction between one copy of a

This preview shows page 35 - 37 out of 83 pages.

We have textbook solutions for you!
The document you are viewing contains questions related to this textbook.
Business Law: Text and Cases
The document you are viewing contains questions related to this textbook.
Chapter 8 / Exercise 3
Business Law: Text and Cases
Clarkson/Miller
Expert Verified
-you have to make a distinction between one copy of a work and the author’s CR in the intellectual conception (which always stay with the author unless transferred) -by taping the show there was a fixed copy and her 106(1) rights were infringed -106(2) derivative works – put poster in new context and that could be argued that it is a modification -106(5): the right of public display being infringed -court determined that as a whole then they showed it enough to classify as de minimus -the modern trend re: de minimus is moving away from this court’s interpretation -despite how much time it is on there, if it is hard to recognize the use may be qualitatively de minimus as opposed to quantitative court just straight up rejects that saying this poster was recognizable Key Statutory limitations on the 106(5) rights 109(c) – similar to the right of first sale – Right of Local Public Showing: if you are the owner of a lawful copy of a work you can publicly display that work to people that are gathered at a particular physical location (art gallery, museum etc.) -also to use a mechanical device to display one copy (only) at that particular location 110: limitation in note 8 113(c): 120(a): limitation in note 11 Internet Issues with respect to the right of public display -it is more intuitive that if you post a CR work on a website w/out permission etc. you clearly violate of the right of public display
We have textbook solutions for you!
The document you are viewing contains questions related to this textbook.
Business Law: Text and Cases
The document you are viewing contains questions related to this textbook.
Chapter 8 / Exercise 3
Business Law: Text and Cases
Clarkson/Miller
Expert Verified
Downloaded From OutlineDepot.com -the 9 th circuit has held that in the case of a search engine that shows a picture of the site, violates the CR 106(6) (6) in the case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission. -recording companies have a new opportunity to argue for a public performance right with the influx of digital audio -worried about perfect copies of stuff -worried about albums becoming obsolete Digital Transmission : A “digital transmission” is a transmission in whole or in part in a digital or other non-analog format. -any part via digital recording – that counts (even if the majority is analog) -need a public performance: needs a live streaming of a sound recordings (public) before the 106(6) right is implicated 114(1): over the air broadcast via digital means are exempted from the 106 rights -radio stations can continue to play their songs and not have to pay royalties to the recording companies (still have to pay for the underlying composition though) 114(2 ): real time (streamed feeds) transmission services of a non-interactive nature (includes subscription services –cable and satellite music channels – but it is not interactive in the sense you can’t pick what songs are on) subject to a statutory license 114(3): real time services of an interactive nature have to negotiate a license (recording companies can simply deny you the right to use their songs) 115 amendments : just makes it clear that if you have a service like itunes that is delivering copies of songs via the internet that is a public distribution and they need a license to do that

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture