Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDoc
I never said they "must" be met, I said that fair use falls under 4 factors... We aren't talking about monopolies. We're talking about fair use, which has time shifting 'under it' for personal use, as quoted from wiki and a court case. Nobody demanded anything, they simply followed the law. I don't really care about the commercial/non-commercial use or what the mild twists of the law are based on what you do with content, that isn't related to the point at all.
|
you took a portion for audio recording for personal use and applyed it to timeshifting
the court case never said that either
in fact the recent extension of timeshifting in a cloud proves the exact opposite
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/08/victory-dvrs-cloud
if timeshifting was only valid for personal use
then cable vision providing timeshifting thru the public cloud for a monthly pvr fee would have been illegal.
your pulling the personal use condition out of your ass
Quote:
|
Point was and still is... your example is vastly different than Robbies, and that's true.
|
yeah i agree i am right and he is wrong huge difference
changing the subtitles of a clip to change the CONTEXT is fair use of parody
you don't have to create something from scratch to have the right to have your work called parody.