MAZEL TOV!!! I'm going to use it immediately--both in my Mass Media class, and in my magic article right now!! I just reread it and it's wonderful, wonderful! Proud to know you!
oh, i just glanced over it, but it looks really interesting! will safe and try to print out at school tomorrow to read in hardcopy.
i had a huge debate with my husband the other day, b/c we've been collectingacademic slash and fan culture articles for potential contributors in a protected web space. he was all up in arms, but i felt that the purpose overrode any potential copyright violations (OK, so i have a pretty loose sense of copyrights...i think there are legal and moral violations and the second category is smaller..d'loading buffy eps when they're old and not available...OK; d'loading DVD rips...not so much so)
i'm utterly fascinated by the fact that posting my own articles would be copyright violation, right?
I got all excited when I saw the summary, and then I realized that this is you! That's very exciting. I'm going to print it up tomorrow at work to read.
Depends on your contract with the journals -- most of the ones I see let you authorize copying of your own article, at least after a certain period of time. But law journals may be special (in this as in a variety of other, less attractive ways).
Very nice! The point about agreeing being just as valuable as disagreeing is particularly well put, as is the one about the prohibitive cost of reshooting an audiovisual work in order to comment on it. Also I love the phrase "the horrendous defect of their virtue". And I would *love* to see a critical version of Word.
I had no idea that multiple copies for classroom use were fair use -- textbook publishers kicked up such a fuss over course packets when I was in school that I just assumed they were right.
::fangirls all over you::
Do you teach a class on these issues that I might be able to audit sometime?
Multiple copies for classroom use *can* be fair (or at least *could* be fair) but publishers never liked that, and convincing people not to copy is as good as actually having a legal rule against copying, if not better.
I don't know if I'm going to be teaching copyright again soon -- also, I'm down in DC now, so that might be a difficult commute for you!
Incredible Essay. That's quite the puzzle, and a cause near and dear to my heart, as one who is on the front lines of "but my son needs this for his homework, can't we just copy the encyclopedia?"
I'm going to copy this for myself ::g:: and pass along the link to several other librarian types. I'm sure they'll enjoy it as much. Thanks for sharing, and congratulations on the publication!
In the early 1980s, you may or may not recall the music industry campaign to prevent people from making mixtapes. Whether you remember or not, the campaign slogan should sound familiar: "Home Taping Is Killing Music - and it's illegal."
Yes, the same crap the music industry is peddling today about file sharing, it peddled in the early 1980s, a period that saw the flowering of punk, alternative rock, and hiphop -- not to mention the enormous growth of the music industry.
Now the guys at Downhill Battle, who have down some great work fighting the copyright cartel, are selling a t-shirt poking fun at industry fear-mongering: "Home taping is killing the music industry.... and it's fun."
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
no subject
i had a huge debate with my husband the other day, b/c we've been collectingacademic slash and fan culture articles for potential contributors in a protected web space. he was all up in arms, but i felt that the purpose overrode any potential copyright violations (OK, so i have a pretty loose sense of copyrights...i think there are legal and moral violations and the second category is smaller..d'loading buffy eps when they're old and not available...OK; d'loading DVD rips...not so much so)
i'm utterly fascinated by the fact that posting my own articles would be copyright violation, right?
no subject
no subject
no subject
Congratulations!
no subject
(and, needless to say, saved a copy.)
no subject
no subject
no subject
i'm sorry...i was just talking at you with some of the thoughts i've had...
anyway, thanks for linking!!!
no subject
no subject
I had no idea that multiple copies for classroom use were fair use -- textbook publishers kicked up such a fuss over course packets when I was in school that I just assumed they were right.
::fangirls all over you::
Do you teach a class on these issues that I might be able to audit sometime?
no subject
Multiple copies for classroom use *can* be fair (or at least *could* be fair) but publishers never liked that, and convincing people not to copy is as good as actually having a legal rule against copying, if not better.
I don't know if I'm going to be teaching copyright again soon -- also, I'm down in DC now, so that might be a difficult commute for you!
no subject
no subject
I'm going to copy this for myself ::g:: and pass along the link to several other librarian types. I'm sure they'll enjoy it as much. Thanks for sharing, and congratulations on the publication!
no subject
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/news/010705_NW_sketcher.html
Do you feel prescient yet? *g*
In the early 1980s, you may or may not recall the music industry campaign to prevent people from making mixtapes. Whether you remember
or not, the campaign slogan should sound familiar: "Home Taping Is Killing Music - and it's illegal."
Yes, the same crap the music industry is peddling today about file sharing, it peddled in the early 1980s, a period that saw the flowering of punk, alternative rock, and hiphop -- not to mention the enormous growth of the music industry.
Now the guys at Downhill Battle, who have down some great work fighting the copyright cartel, are selling a t-shirt poking fun at industry fear-mongering: "Home taping is killing the music industry.... and it's fun."
http://www.downhillbattle.org/postal/index.php
no subject
no subject