Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: a fool in paradise; autumnraine

I agree that videotaping something off TV to use in class is absurd. However, the claim that they can’t teach without multimedia frou-frou is absurd, too - particularly when it involves copyrighted Hollywood materials.


11 posted on 05/07/2009 2:22:34 PM PDT by Tax-chick ("This is our duty: to zot their sorry arses into the next time zone." ~ Admin Mod)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: Tax-chick
However, the claim that they can't teach without multimedia frou-frou is absurd

Irrelevant. They can teach in a cave by scratching diagrams into the rock, but there's no reason they should be expected to do that, either.

The bottom line is that the law permits a certain degree of fair use, and Hollyweird is attempting to violate that law. If the GOP had any spine, the DMCA would be history and infringements of fair-use rights would carry penalties every bit as severe as infringements of copyright.

16 posted on 05/07/2009 2:25:25 PM PDT by steve-b (Intelligent design is to evolutionary biology what socialism is to free-market economics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Tax-chick

Copyright has an EXEMPTION for educational purposes. Quit letting Hollywood Big Media rewrite our nation’s copyright laws.

They’ve already extended the duration of “limited time” to beyond our lifetime (it is agreed that all works eventually will lapse, by agreement, into the public domain, we will never live to see that day under current extensions).

They are now working to change 80+ years of established history on royalties paid by stations for music on played on the radio.

Their rotten business model is sinking. If they didn’t have 75+ years of pop culture sitting in vaults (much of which would have become public domain by now if they had not continued lobbying for the change of existing laws), they would have been bankrupted decades ago.

Why is it Mark Twain, Edgar Allen Poe, and the majority of novels adapted by Disney are public domain but the works of MGM, Disney, and WB are not? Are they some how more deserving?

In England, they are working to extend copyright another 25 years. Why? Because unlike the works of Elvis, and Sinatra, and even the Brit Lonnie Donagan, they are concerned that the works of the godly Beatles are going to suddenly lapse into the public domain. Heaven forbid. Two of them are dead and Paul is worth upwards of a billion dollars.

But the laws must be changed for cultural reasons. If they’d seen fit to protect ALL artists along the way, they may have had a case.

And none of their arguments should trump the rights of educators to do as has been permitted for the entire 20th century.


23 posted on 05/07/2009 2:30:30 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (If Liberals are so upset over torture, why did they mock John McCains stiff arms during the campaign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Tax-chick

And I disagree completely.

As a Criminal Justice student, we watch Forensic File episodes, Documentaries on prisons, 20/20 and other such videos about twice a week.

To think you expect the teacher to stand up there and recite every point in a classroom setting is not only ridiculous, but time consuming and unnecessary.

He can explain the ENTIRE case with a flash point of images, or he can pop in an episode of 20/20. Which is better for the educational system? I know I pay attention to the TV show more, I’m sure I’m not the only one.


30 posted on 05/07/2009 2:35:09 PM PDT by autumnraine (Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose- Kris Kristoferrson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson