Re:Police officer plays Taylor Swift song to keep a video of...
by pseudalopex on Friday July 02, 2021 @01:16AM
(#27708022)
You keep implying the fair use factors are evaluated separately. They're balanced together. And the other 3 factors are against the officer.
Re:Police officer plays Taylor Swift song to keep a video of...
by robbrown451 on Friday July 02, 2021 @02:28AM
(#27708385)
You're wrong. I assure you, I know this stuff. If the owner can't demonstrate harm, they have no case. "The other three factors" don't cause harm to the owner, so they have no case.
You can't successfully bring a tort case (which copyright infringement is) if you can't demonstrate harm.
Re:Police officer plays Taylor Swift song to keep a video of...
by otterley on Friday July 02, 2021 @07:00PM
(#27717910)
> I assure you, I know this stuff
Where did you go to law school, exactly?
Copyright infringement is not tort. Copyright infringement is a creature of federal law, not common law like tort is. And copyright owners can claim statutory damages of up to $150,000 per work in lieu of actual damages at their election. See 17 U.S. 504(c).
And fair use is a defense to a prima facie copyright infringement claim.
Re:Police officer plays Taylor Swift song to keep a video of...
by pseudalopex on Monday July 05, 2021 @05:03PM
(#27741795)
Copyright infringement is a statutory tort. But you're right the law makes the infringement itself a violation. And fair use is just a defense.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#3._Amount_and_substan...
Basically, the record company would have to make the case that because this cop played the song, they are losing sales because I guess people are listening to this instead. And not on YouTube, in person, because the person posting it on YouTube would be the one responsible for that. These arguments are utterly absurd.