Re: "Bowdlerizing for Columbine" piece

>>> LDWG[_at_]noholaw.com 01/23/03 06:22AM >>>
I'm definitely missing something about this whole issue. The TV networks have been doing exactly the same kind of "edited for TV" sanitization for decades and nobody has come howling after NBC. If I can pay cable fees to enable me to make VCR copies of the edited work from a TV network, why can't I pay for a videotape that makes exactly the same kind of edits? Both vendors clearly are using the edited works for commercial purposes.
<<<<<

The TV networks are authorized; they have paid the copyright owner for the right to prepare and broadcast a derivative work. The Clean Flicks and Clear Play enterprises have not.

As far as the consumer, the Supreme Court ruled in the Betamax case (Sony v. Universal) that consumers had a fair use right to use a VCR for timeshifting purposes. The Court did NOT rule that consumers had a fair use right to keep the taped program after it had been viewed once. The fact that many people do so doesn't make it legal, and I would be extremely surprised if any court were to rule that "librarying" by an individual was a fair use.

Tyler T. Ochoa
Professor and Co-Director
Center for Intellectual Property Law
Whittier Law School
3333 Harbor Blvd.
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
(714) 444-4141, ext. 243
(714) 444-1854 (fax)
tochoa[_at_]law.whittier.edu Received on Fri Jan 24 2003 - 23:29:57 GMT