Monthly Archive for September, 2001

Page 2 of 20

elect oprah! elect brian! elect vinh!

VINH! You’re Different!Oprah makes me pretty much laugh. I don’t know what it is, back in the days where she had midget wrestlers cheating on their wives/sisters with barnyard animals like everyone else, she had my respect. Then she began trying to save the world. First, it was the Angel Network thing. Hokey, but I didn’t watch her show anymore (reference the previous lack of midgets/cheaters comment) so it didn’t really matter. She was trying to do something good for the world. And housewives in kitty sweaters and wooden bead necklaces with things like #1 MOM on them rejoiced throughout the midland.

Then came her special doctor guys who starting telling all the midland housewives that they need GRL POWER! And to stop eating chocolate. And to get some Jesus. Okay, Dr. Billy. These guys get there diplomas off TV and then act CHARISMATIC and like Jesus is their co-pilot, and then Oprah thinks they are cute and adopts them and they make millions. I love it, they are brilliant. I could so do that! Tel me your problems.

Then the magazine came. Her face is overtaking my parents home. It’s so creepy. Mom. Stop getting this magazine. (Insert quick story here: My mother had a client who was CRAZY. Really, nuts. Used to call my parents house from her hospital talking about radio waves in her head. Yep, in an institution. And in her Christmas cards, Crazy Lady used to put tear-out inspirational message cards, straight from the OPRAH magazine. Rad! This is a sign.)

But then the book clubs got spiritual too and spiritual spiritual spiritual JESUS GOD spiritual DR. PHIL Jesus…….and she started having SPIRIT MOMENTS and the world started trying to spin faster just to throw me off of it so I wouldn’t succumb to some violent streak against Oprah.

But the thing that is worst to me is the Book Club. Granted, she has gotten people who spent their whole lives reading the Weekly World News to read books again. (I love that part in “So I Married an Axe Murderer, where the Scottish mom refers to the WWN as “the paper”. She is like the ultimate symbolic Orpah fanwoman.) So, like I was saying, she’s single handedly perverting the publishing industry, and I would eat a baby if she ever had anything by David Foster Wallace (or Frank Zappa, yeah!) on her list. All her books are about beaten/raped women who escaped their situations and rose to became great people, or beaten/raped slave women who escaped their situations and rose to became great people.

So, a new idea for her Book Club. Make it like a reality show, I’ve heard that’s hip nowdays. And you know how Oprah and I like to be hip. Lock all these women in a decedant Oprah room with special tea and diet snacky-snacks and big comfy pillows and fabrics that cost more than my soul is worth. Have them read “Ruth’s Story” or “Saving Mary” or “Bastard Girl Who is Beaten with Chains and Falls in Love” or “Love and Jewelry in Savannah,” and then set a rabid dog loose in the room. Whoever can get out wins lunch with the author. Happy reading.

Less Psychotic

Plans for tonight include seeing “Zoolander.” (“I’m pretty sure there’s more to life than just being really, really good looking, and I plan on finding out what that is.”) Then I have a wedding to attend on Saturday, so I will not be able to go see David Byrne, which sucks. But I am sure the lovely guy in the Misfits shirt at 930 will be happy not to see me for one night.

If anyone is looking for a Byrne ticket for Saturday night, email me. I might have one for you.

Speaking of movies my favorite movie forever was “Gleaming the Cube.” Maybe it still is my favorite. Christian Slater as Brian. With the half-blond dreds, and then he turns preppy when his brother Vinh dies? I love it. “You’re different, Brian. You’re gleaming the cube.” Undeniably funky. Does anyone know if that is out on DVD? It should be. Even if I don’t own a DVD player. I can get it for Sig, and force him to watch it with me.

Elect Jesus

I saw a bumper sticker yesterday on my way home from work that said “Elect Jesus Your King.” I am confused, because King’s aren’t elected, doesn’t that go against the whole monarchy/royal family lineage thing? And besides, who would want to campaign AGAINST Jesus? You’d need some mad, mad dough.

Teach Your Kids Geography

This Salon article was great. Yesterdays article on “America the Ignorant.” Go read.

“For decades we’ve been reading about how American schoolchildren can’t find Mexico or Canada on a map, and yet nothing seems to change,” says Ransdell. “These people who don’t know the difference between Switzerland and Swaziland then become the main consumers of news. And in poll after poll they tell us that they want less foreign news and more of what I call ‘selfish journalism’ — which stocks to buy, sex and beauty tips, 10 steps to a healthier colon and so on. It becomes this horrible feedback loop where people are sent out of our schools in a state of complete ignorance of the rest of the world and then, maybe because they’re embarrassed, clamor for even less information on something they know almost nothing about.”

ladies and gentleman: mister michael mccready

go buy the rushmore soundtrack this instant...hook it up!IM of the day:
xtykat: well, u have a nice ass!
xtykat: i want to see more ass!

Today was Yom Kippur. I repented. My sins are gone, or so they say. And I didnt even have to go to temple. So yeah, I took the day off, but didnt find out my ‘rents didnt care if i went to the temple until i got up. Oh well…it was very cool of them, none the less. I worked out a lot of legal stuff with Mark on the Tempo Team contract and worked a little on MONSIII. They really just wanted me to take off, more or less. So the weekend plan: Tomorrow night: Weezer and then i am going to hopefully make it out to The Black Cat to see Modest Mouse with “The Part Timer” courtesy of her new swanky Sony job hookup. That is still up in the air. I think the last time I was there was with Zander and Al, when i walked up to their table and they were eating with Mike Watt and I didnt realize it until i sat down. Anyways…it will be cool to see the new Black Cat. Then Saturday during the day is Dinner with Karin and Mikey and some other peeps. Then at night is David Byrne with “See Say” – I have no clue how to spell that, but Becca says they rule. So I am down for music that “rules.” Plus seeing Mr. Byrne will satisfy one of my lifelong dreams. Becca said she wanted to go, so i asked at the station for tickets. The rest is history. Sunday is open. Maybe i’ll go to church. Oh yeah, and I think “The Part-Timer” may be involved somewhere in there. Will she? …And my original plan of not talking with her or mentioning her here all week was a huge failure. It’s a rough life man. Irresistable. And insatiable. Two vicious combinations.

Oh shit. Today during the day, I was on IM. And basically everone at work was in a huge IM Chat room, so we all sat there for like an hour and justed talked shit about each other. It was quite funny and I laughed outloud many of times. Making fun of Korinne was great. Feels good man. Har har. Elliot even gave me a few Hi-Fives. Go Mat!

I cant believe I dont have THE WHO’S LIVE AT LEEDS. I am going to pick this up tomorrow after work or during my lunch break, cos I heard they just remastered it. Let’s see action. Let’s see people.

Out here in the fields
I fight for my meals
I get my back into my living
I don’t need to fight
To prove I’m right
I don’t need to be forgiven

Don’t cry
Don’t raise your eye
It’s only teenage wasteland

Sally ,take my hand
Travel south crossland
Put out the fire
Don’t look past my shoulder

The exodus is here
The happy ones are near
Let’s get together
Before we get much older

Teenage wasteland
It’s only teenage wasteland
Teenage wasteland
Oh, oh
Teenage wasteland
They’re all wasted!

fair use in our lives

dude, why cant everyone have magical boobies?Mat
April 20, 1999
RIM370 Wed 6pm
Professor Mulraine
Copyright Law

FAIR USE IN OUR LIVES

The Fair Use Doctrine was developed over the years as the courts tried to balance the rights of copyright owners with the people’s interest in allowing copying. This doctrine has at its crux, a crucial thought that not all copying should be illegal, particularly in socially important instances such as criticism, news, education, and research.

The Fair Use Doctrine is now set forth in the Copyright Act. Under the Act there are four factors to be considered in order to decide whether a particular copying is to be determined a “fair use.” These factors are:

1 .the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

It can be rather difficult to determine whether or not a particular use is a “fair use”. The four factors that are laid out in the doctrine can often lead to conflicting thoughts.

The first is a factor of “purpose and character” of the use. For example, if someone used a quotation for a review for a commercial magazine, this would mean that the first of the two factors (purpose) should state that there is no fair use. On the other hand, the fact that the purpose of the use was to review a work would lead to the fact favoring fair use.

The second factor is “nature of the copyrighted work.” For example, a new sound recording or book is a great example of a work, which should be protected by copyright law. As a result, the second factor weighs toward a finding of no fair use. If the recording or book had not yet been published, this would be even more important. It can be quite hard to prove fair use in the borrowing or quotation of an unpublished recording or book, respectively. However, it can not be impossible, since the unpublished status of a work is only one of the four elements when using fair use.

The third factor is “amount and substantiality taken.” As for the third factor, only short parts from a book could be included in a review. This generally means that in this instance that the third factor will rule in favor of a finding of fair use. However, the “quality” of the part taken is looked at under this factor as well as the “quantity.” It is quite possible that these rather short passages are the most important part of the book. If this were the case, the third factor of “amount” would most likely lead to no fair use.

The fourth factor is the “effect on potential market for protected work,” which I personally think is the most important of the four. For example, a negative review of an upcoming record would obviously impact the market or value of the copyrighted work. However, some courts have stated that for this factor you are to look only at the portion taken to investigate the effect on the market, and not at any negative comments contained in a review. Therefor the question would be whether the addition of the short passages in a magazine review would really affect the market for the record. When only rather short passages are use, the courts have generally held that there isn’t an effect on the market, and this factor should be of fair use.

Fair use can show itself everywhere. If a church was to release a CD of their favorite songs performed in their congregation for their use to learn the songs by, they could claim fair use. The church is typically a not for profit organization which will typically go under the purpose of the use. The use here is in no way for profit and what they gain from it will be by no means for profit. The courts would say that this use would be in fair use.

Another problem can come up when using performance licenses. Assuming your church is televising a religious revival on an international level for a three-week period. The show would be taped live in a church each evening and there would be musical performances on the program each night. Would you then need a license for these performances? The answer is: No. There are compulsory licenses, granted by the Copyright Act that may be use as the copyright owner sees fit. For example, if an author of a pamphlet does not want the pamphlet published or distributed, the author as the copyright owner can prevent publication and distribution. However, there are a couple exceptions to this rule, made in the Copyright Act, under compulsory licenses. These compulsory licenses allow third parties to copy, perform, or distribute certain types of works without the copyright owner’s permission, in exchange for which the third parties must pay a predetermined royalty amount. These compulsory licenses are extremely limited, and apply in only five circumstances:

1. the production of new sound recordings based upon an existing non-dramatic musical recording;
2. The performance of a non-dramatic musical recording in a jukebox;
3. The simultaneous retransmission of television signals by cable television operators;
4. The performance, display and recording of certain works by public broadcasting entities; and
5. A temporary right to retransmit television signals via satellite to household satellite dishes

This instance of the broadcasting of this religious revival would then fall under the third through fifth circumstances depending on where the broadcast was broadcasted from.

In schools, teachers will make copies of newspaper or magazine articles for their students in order for the student to better understand an idea. How far can the author or owner go to curtail this under fair use doctrine? The law does dictate that you can photocopy copyrighted material for educational purposes, however you have rigid guidelines. For example, when making multiple copies for classroom use you are limited for poems to be 250 words, complete prose to 2,500 word and prose exerpts to 1,000 words. When concerning music in the classroom the restrictions are less detailed but perhaps for rigid. When using sheet music for education, you can excerpt no more than 10% of the whole work, and can edit as long as the fundamental character of the work is not distorted or lyrics altered or added. For sound recordings a single copy of copyrighted music owned by that specific school or the individual teacher may be made, as long as it is only used for aural exercises or examinations.

The only entity not covered so far in fair use would be: parody and satire. The difference between parody (in which the copyrighted work is the target) and satire (in which the copyrighted work is there to make fun of another target) by going back to the language in the Acuff-Rose case. [Accuff-Rose v. Campbell, 972 F.2d 1429 (6th Cir. 1992)] There it was stated that “Parody needs to mimic an original to make its point, and so has some claim to use the creation of its victim’s (or collective victims’) imagination, whereas satire can stand on its two feet and so requires justification for the very act of borrowing.” So in parody your new work must be poking fun at the original and nothing else.

When deciding if a copying is protected under fair use there are only a few factors: purpose & character, nature, substantiality, and effect. Even though there are only a few selected factors involving fair use the decision can be a tedious one and the opinions of the courts will all be different. I am personally all for the fair use doctrine. My only qualm with the doctrine is for education. I believe you should be able to use copyrighted material at your leisure in an educational learning institution. There is to be no loss for the copyright owner, only gain.