28
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 24:
Line 24: +
→Copyright violations to make a point are still copyright violations
:The moral issue is academic freedom. The motivation of these "infringement" reports is not so much to ensure that copyright owners get all the money they deserve, but to suppress the message of the film - which, ironically, is that Darwinsts suppress all criticism of their ideas. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 14:59, 23 April 2008 (EDT)
:The moral issue is academic freedom. The motivation of these "infringement" reports is not so much to ensure that copyright owners get all the money they deserve, but to suppress the message of the film - which, ironically, is that Darwinsts suppress all criticism of their ideas. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 14:59, 23 April 2008 (EDT)
::I'm not aware that "academic freedom" is a defense to copyright infringement! Further, that legal issue is in fact settled. Although it depends upon the nature of the use of the "seconds," a copyright violation can cease to be ''de minimis'' from a use of as few as 60 seconds of video/audio. Would you like to submit a reading plan for Title 17 of the US Code? I can suggest you start with ss 106-07.-[[User:Chimera1|Chimera1]] 15:02, 23 April 2008 (EDT)