You mau be right, I am not sure that you are. I have seen information that sugguests they don't ask or pay all the time, but I can't find an answer on what that specific shows does either way. But it really doesn't matter what they choose to do, because legally, it is their choice. I also know for certain that not all shows that use internet video's and other internet material always ask because, again, legally they don't have to. Late night talk shows almost never do, also for profit. If you are using the material for commentary or parody, it is fair use.
Heck, this also applies to the news media which is a for profit business in the US. They use internet clips all the time, quotes, video, they often don't ask, and they don't have to. All covered under fair use laws. So, again, I don't know if you are right about Tosh specifically, but even if you are, my point still stands. Thy are not the only people who use other people's material for profit through fair use laws, there are countless other examples, it is legal, it is there right to do it, and that is America. You don't have to like it, but they don't have to care.
Commentary or parody would require some creative input on their part. Blogologues can probably argue just enough to clear any legal hurdle but I think it's morally lacking and exploitative since it is performed word for word. My argument is that they are creatively lacking bottom feeders.
Commentary and parody is how some of the other examples I gave use things under fair use. There are a lot of different ways an original work can be used under fair use. If you read my original post that is not what I said applies here.I said quotes and commentary are generally considered fair use. Not commentary about the original writing as I mean it when I say commentary and parody, I mean that the original writing is commentary it self.
When you write something relatively short that is a commentary on another subject, which many of the stories here, and almost all of the comments here are, that commentary is generally considered fair use under the law.
Lets use Tosh as an example again, because he is using a video to make commentary on it he can use it as fair use. Now if you quote Tosh's commentary on a video, you can use his words withiut his permission, because his words are commentary of a subject and are therefore free use for you.
It is the second half of that example that applies here. IIN users write commentary on a subject, and the comedy group quotes that commentary under fair use.
IIN Other People Performing Our Material?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
You mau be right, I am not sure that you are. I have seen information that sugguests they don't ask or pay all the time, but I can't find an answer on what that specific shows does either way. But it really doesn't matter what they choose to do, because legally, it is their choice. I also know for certain that not all shows that use internet video's and other internet material always ask because, again, legally they don't have to. Late night talk shows almost never do, also for profit. If you are using the material for commentary or parody, it is fair use.
Heck, this also applies to the news media which is a for profit business in the US. They use internet clips all the time, quotes, video, they often don't ask, and they don't have to. All covered under fair use laws. So, again, I don't know if you are right about Tosh specifically, but even if you are, my point still stands. Thy are not the only people who use other people's material for profit through fair use laws, there are countless other examples, it is legal, it is there right to do it, and that is America. You don't have to like it, but they don't have to care.
--
VirgilManly
8 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Much of your comparisons are apples and oranges.
Commentary or parody would require some creative input on their part. Blogologues can probably argue just enough to clear any legal hurdle but I think it's morally lacking and exploitative since it is performed word for word. My argument is that they are creatively lacking bottom feeders.
--
VinnyB
8 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Commentary and parody is how some of the other examples I gave use things under fair use. There are a lot of different ways an original work can be used under fair use. If you read my original post that is not what I said applies here.I said quotes and commentary are generally considered fair use. Not commentary about the original writing as I mean it when I say commentary and parody, I mean that the original writing is commentary it self.
When you write something relatively short that is a commentary on another subject, which many of the stories here, and almost all of the comments here are, that commentary is generally considered fair use under the law.
Lets use Tosh as an example again, because he is using a video to make commentary on it he can use it as fair use. Now if you quote Tosh's commentary on a video, you can use his words withiut his permission, because his words are commentary of a subject and are therefore free use for you.
It is the second half of that example that applies here. IIN users write commentary on a subject, and the comedy group quotes that commentary under fair use.