Posted on 07/27/2023 9:13:38 AM PDT by Red Badger
Producers of Jason Aldean’s “Try That in a Small Town” music video have quietly removed archival footage of Black Lives Matter rioters after Fox threatened legal action, according to a new report.
The footage in question is a brief series of clips from Fox 5 Atlanta showing BLM rioters violently protesting in the streets, TMZ reported. Sources told TMZ the company that produced the video reached out to Fox back in May and asked for permission to use the six seconds of news footage.
Fox reportedly asked for more information, specifically the lyrics of the song. But the production company sent Fox a link to the song rather than the lyrics in writing.
A week ago, Fox reached out to the production company and asked them to edit out the footage to avoid any legal action and the production company complied, TMZ reported. Sources described the request as a “polite ultimatum.”
The re-edited “Try That in a Small Town” music video replaces the BLM riot footage — projected on the front of a courthouse building — with shots of Aldean performing the song.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Replace it with private video that was taken by hundreds of people over those years.
The Murdochs are no more American, no more pro-American than Fidel Castro was. Ruppert has been for years a CIA informant, and he has been paid off quite well.
One supports FOX at America’s peril.
Agree and the MSM are the fuel for riots never a word about a democrat connection.
Why bother....Im sure there is plenty of random stock footage out there of BLM animals burning down America during the summer of love.
“They probably could have won the case against Fox, since it clearly falls under the “fair use” exception to copyright law.”
Unless Jason Aldean is giving away his music and performing the song for free, then the fair use doctrine does not apply.
Over the years Ive seen a lot of videos I listen to slowly remove and diminish the stars and bars being displayed. Many artist adjust their product to be publicly consumed.
If you’re still watching Fox Snooze ask yourself why?
Again, as I said to the other poster who already tried to claim that, it’s a common misconception but it isn’t actually true. There are plenty of cases where fair use applies to for profit work as well.
then recut it with actual cell footage from citizen journalists.
No misconception on my end. 17 U.S.C. § 107 specifically provides that "criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright [emphasis added]"
Although I agree that "fair use" may apply in limited commercial settings, I dispute your statement that the use of the video "clearly" falls within fair use. It is anything but clear.
President Trump should stop going on
.
“No misconception on my end. 17 U.S.C. § 107 specifically provides that “criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright [emphasis added]””
Oh you didn’t just add emphasis, you selectively edited the quote to remove key relevant words which precede the section that you quoted. Let’s correct that, shall we?
“Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—”
Notice the words “such as” that you omitted. In legal terminology, those denote the succeeding list is not exclusive; it does not attempt to list all uses of a work which may be considered fair use.
Also note the language “the factors to be consider shall include”. This means all the factors that are listed below shall be considered by the court, but that the court is not limited from considering other factors, and in fact, courts have and do consider other factors.
Then note that “commercial nature” of the work is only 1 of 4 factors that are required to be considered. Which means a work may be commercial, and still be found to be a fair use based upon the other 3 listed factors, or upon such other factors that the court may consider which are not listed.
“I dispute your statement that the use of the video “clearly” falls within fair use.”
You can dispute whatever you like, it’s a free country. Just don’t try to falsely claim that commercial use bars a fair use exception, since it does not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.