Computers, Privacy & the Constitution

View   r22  >  r21  ...
JustinColanninoFirstPaper 22 - 13 May 2009 - Main.JustinColannino
Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="FirstPaper"
Draft under revision.
Line: 23 to 23
 Adaptation, both lyrically and musically, is a factor in the success of music to encourage collective action. Guthrie, Seeger, and others had a large public domain to draw upon to craft their songs, including the country and African-American traditions. However, there was a concern even at that time that copyright could deter the civil rights movement and be used in support of Jim Crow. In a 1952 issue of Sing Out! Irwin Silber wrote, "at a time when a growing Negro people's cultural movement is rediscovering its own heritage and proudly and beautifully re-creating it, [pirates] have set barriers in the path of this development by attempting to take this music out of the area of the 'public domain' and making it impossible for the Negro people to sing their own songs without getting (and paying for) permission from the white copyright owners."(1) The problem that Mr. Silber was afraid of in 1952 is more dire today because of the greatly expanded copyright term. Now, copyright controls the current generation's familiar songs so that these songs are impossible, absent permission, to adapt to a specific social movement.

Notes

1 : Irwin Silber, Song Pirates Fly Skull-and-Bones Over Tin Pan Alley, Sing Out!, June 1952 at 6.

Changed:
<
<		At a minimum, copyright limits the adaptation of familiar songs to social movements, including fundraisers and online organizing. According to recent supreme court language,(2) when free speech and copyright come into conflict the protections of fair use(3) and the idea expression dichotomy(4) provide protection for political First Amendment values. However, these copyright exceptions do not protect from the harm done to social movements.

Notes

2 : Eldred v. Ashcroft, 537 U.S. 186, 190 (2003) ("In addition, copyright law contains built-in First Amendment accommodations. First, 17 U.S.C. § 102(b), which makes only expression, not ideas, eligible for copyright protection, strikes a definitional balance between the First Amendment and copyright law by permitting free communication of facts while still protecting an author's expression. Second, the “fair use” defense codified at § 107 allows the public to use not only facts and ideas contained in a copyrighted work, but also expression itself for limited purposes." (internal citations omitted)).

3 : 17 U.S.C. § 107

4 : See, 17 U.S.C. § 102(b)

>
>		At a minimum, copyright limits the ability of social movements to adapt familiar works to support their cause, which can neuter the message conveyed. According to recent supreme court language,(5) when free speech and copyright come into conflict the protections of fair use(6) and the idea expression dichotomy(7) provide protection for political First Amendment values. However, these copyright exceptions do not protect from the harm done to social movements.
 

Idea expression dichotomy


Revision 22r22 - 13 May 2009 - 21:29:00 - JustinColannino
Revision 21r21 - 13 May 2009 - 18:10:28 - JustinColannino
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
Syndicate this site RSSATOM