Re: TotalNEWS & Derivative Works

Mark Lemley <mlemley[_at_]mail.law.utexas.edu> wrote:
>
> Phil Stripling <philip[_at_]crl.com> wrote:
> >
> > You can perform a copyrighted play without every having made a copy of
> > the script. The actors memorize their lines from watching the movie,
> > then you sell tickets, and you do the performance on stage. No copies
> > are made. The public performance of the play is a violation of the
> > playwright's copyright (assuming it exists). Display and performance
> > are a part of the act, along with copies.
> >
> ***************
>
> Agreed. Let's take that example. Are television manufacturers liable
> for publicly performing television shows?

Not even close; sorry. My example is the public performance of a play without having made a "copy" of the play and you jump to the manufacturer of a TV set????? Sorry, I just don't get it. You're way over my head.

> The TV manufacturer seems to
> me to be in much the same situation as Total News -- they are providing
> an easy means for you to view content, but it is someone else who is
> providing that content. [Indeed, if you buy one of the new TVs that
> allows you to *frame* a second channel in a corner box while watching
> a first channel on the main screen, the analogy would seem to be complete].

Nope, not even close. TotalNews is not a manufacturer of my computer/monitor. They're not even the programmer of my browser. And if _I_ choose to frame my page, that's my call, isn't it? My point seems to be getting further and further away.

> The problem with the performance analogy you give lies in the phrase "and
> you do the performance on stage." Total News hasn't done that.

The problem is my statement that no copy was made, yet there's a copyright infringement. Display and performance of a copyrighted work are covered by the act. But that's _my_ point, of course, and it's something you keep drawing further and further away from.

Sorry, still no cigar. TotalNews does not have to have made a "copy" of my page, my images, for there to be an infringement of my copyright.

Analogies never work on Usenet Newsgroups, and they don't work here, do they? It is my understanding that as the holder of title to a copyright I have the exclusive right, under US law at least, to control the public display and performance of my works. Those terms are defined in the statute. "Copying" my work is not the sole basis for a claim of infringement.

If I have the exclusive right to control the public display and performance of my works, I get to choose whether people can incorporate my work into their Web page, framed or not.

Phil Striplng
philip[_at_]crl.com Received on Thu Jun 05 1997 - 17:14:16 GMT