« Do Copyrighted Wedding Photos Even Make Sense? |
Main
| More Copyright Photo Inanity »
June 07, 2005
Blink ›
More No Personal Use Exemption Copyright Inanity
Well, I just blogged my belief that making personal use copies of professionally-taken family photos should be perfectly legal (Do Copyrighted Wedding Photos Even Make Sense?). Now BoingBoing publishes another copyright injustice that could be easily solved by judicious application of a personal use exemption (No Recording Your Kid's Tap-Dance Recital Cos of Copyrighted Music):
My daughter had her tap dance recital at the Lincoln theater in DC on sunday (6/3). Despite the fact that I paid for the lessons, paid for the costume, paid for the tickets to the show, and am the father of the child I could NOT videotape my daughters performance because of 'copyright issues' with the background music. The issue magically went away apparently if I purchased the DVD they making of the show for $25.
Of course, it sounds as if copyright law is merely the pretext. Reportedly, the year before they banned still cameras. Why not simply explain that too many cameras might disturb those just there to watch and the price of the DVDs helps offset some of the costs?
posted by Ernest Miller |
|
# |
0 |
0
- RELATED ENTRIES
- › Kitchen Academy - Course II - Day 23
- › Kitchen Academy - Course II - Day 22
- › Kitchen Academy - Course II - Day 21
- › Kitchen Academy - The Hollywood Cookbook and Guest Chef Michael Montilla - March 18th
- › Kitchen Academy - Course II - Day 20
- › Kitchen Academy - Course II - Day 19
- › Kitchen Academy - Course II - Day 18
- › Salsa Verde
Ernest Miller pursues research and writing on cyberlaw, intellectual property, and First Amendment issues. Mr. Miller attended the U.S. Naval Academy before attending Yale Law School, where he was president and co-founder of the Law and Technology Society, and founded the technology law and policy news site LawMeme. He is a fellow of the Information Society Project at Yale Law School.
Ernest Miller's blog postings can also be found @
1. Branko Collin on June 7, 2005 01:48 PM writes...
Yet another suspicious sounding story. Surely, if the daughter gives the recital, it is not the theater who owns the copyright to the performance? It would seem to me that if the Lincoln Theater were selling DVDs of Robert's (daughter's) copyrighted performance, the board would open themselves up to 150,000 US$ in statutory damages and up to one year in prison. And you just know how the other prisoners like people who pick on kids.
In light of that, it seems quite impossible that the Lincoln theater would sell unauthorized DVDs while prohibiting a father from filming the performance to which he owns the recording rights. This story must be a hoax.
Am I wrong or am I wrong?
Permalink to Comment2. Crosbie Fitch on June 7, 2005 04:05 PM writes...
I think this kind of thing should inspire a competition to out-strange truth.
Let's all try and see if we can come up with the most convoluted, crazy, cockamamie, copyright travesty that's just about plausible, but a far stranger fiction than truth could possibly be.
We can then measure the strangeness of the winning entry by how many days it takes before real events reproduce the 'incredible' erstwhile fiction.
Myself, I'm waiting for copyright to join the ranks of 'Thou shalt not utilise an automobile on the public highway without it being preceded by a pedestrian warden with red flag'.
Permalink to Comment