RE: [dvd-discuss] Eldred Amicus

["Arnold G. Reinhold" <reinhold(at)world.std.com>]

If the original work has passed into the public domain, you can 
always copy that. If the additions for the new work (with new 
copyright) are small, you should be happy to simply use the older 
edition. The only problem I see is if the new version is of higher 
quality, say a DVD vs. VHS.  Then the question arises as to what 
happens if you copy the from the new version only the material that 
was in the old version. Is that fair use or even simply non 
infringing? Is there any case law?

Arnold Reinhold


At 10:19 AM -0700 5/30/02, Richard Hartman wrote:
>A standard similar to that of fair use should
>apply.  If the use is small enough, it ain't
>infringement.  If the change is small enough,
>it ain't a new work.
>
>--
>-Richard M. Hartman
>hartman@onetouch.com
>
>186,000 mi./sec ... not just a good idea, it's the LAW!
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Michael A Rolenz [mailto:Michael.A.Rolenz@aero.org]
>> Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 10:10 AM
>> To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
>> Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Eldred Amicus
>>
>>
>> That's another area of copyright law that needs to be
>> reviewed, revised
>> and reformed. Derivative works should be sequels, screenplays
>> or plays
>> from novels or vice versa, radio adaptions, toys, comic
>> books, new revised
>> editions. The essense of this is TRANSFORMATION. There should be some
>> transformation in the derivative work. Adding new footage to
>> an old work
>> doesn't transform it. It's more like having a second edition
>> of a book
>> where somebody adds a new page to each chapter. OTOH, if
>> someone takes a
>> NEW SPecial 150th anniversay of Starwars produced in UltraExtremeDVD
>> format with new rediscovered footage never before seen that
>> was buried in
>> the Lucus Time Capsule at the  INdustrial Light and Magic
>> Shrine and edits
>> all of that out to produce "StarWars-The Original Version" it
>> should not
>> be infringment NOR should it qualify for a copyright of its own.
>> OTherwise, we are back to the perpetual copyright
>> problem....well...every
>> field has it's problems. In CS there's the halting problem.
>> In math, there
>> was Fermat's last theorum. Maybe here we have the perpetual copyright
>> problem
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Ernest Miller <ernest.miller@aya.yale.edu>
>> Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
>> 05/30/2002 09:32 AM
>> Please respond to dvd-discuss
>>
>> 
>>         To:     dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
>>         cc:
>>         Subject:        Re: [dvd-discuss] Eldred Amicus
>>
>>
>> Michael A Rolenz wrote:
>> > Oh...but he would argue that he's had all this time to work
>> on it and
>> > perfect it. Aren't you just jumping for joy? Actually even
>> with a 28yr
>> > term he's still have 3 more yrs to work on it. With a 50
>> yrs term he can
>>
>> > finish it up using his social security and pension ;-)
>>
>> But he's not finished it yet.  Remember the "Special
>> Editions"?  Rumor
>> has it that Jar Jar will be added to Episode 4 and
>> Queen/Senator will be
>> added to Episode 6 (I kid you not, though this is only rumor).  Every
>> new edition will get a new copyright.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Richard Hartman <hartman@onetouch.com>
>> > Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
>> > 05/30/2002 09:18 AM
>> > Please respond to dvd-discuss
>> >
>> >
>> >         To:     "'dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu'"
>> <dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>
>> >         cc:
>> >         Subject:        RE: [dvd-discuss] Eldred Amicus
>> >
>> >
>> > Actually Star Wars is an argument for shorter terms.
>> >
>> > If Lucas were facing a shorter term on his creation,
>> > he might've finished the $(!@ series by now!
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>