There’s a fabulous post over at the Center for Social Media on when using copyrighted material in video comes under fair use. If the work is ‘transformative’ then there’s a strong case for fair use. Examples include:

1. Adding satirical subtitles, fan tributes, parody, critique
2. Using copyright material for illustration of example (e.g. stages in a star’s career)
3. Accidental capture – e.g. music playing in the background while someone dances (if unstaged)
4. Documenting an event or experience, e.g. presence at a concert
5. Mashups, remixes or collages that create new meaning from old material

But of course this is all under American law. My question is: how far do these same examples go under UK law? I’d love to know your experiences and interpretations.

PHP Freelancer

Pat Thornton writes on AP’s plans to stop people sharing news content…

DRM always works like this: It never stops people who really want to steal or break the law, but it almost always hinders law abiding, paying customers. Will this extra layer of code eat up CPU cycles and RAM, bring computers to a halt and not even work on some machines? My guess is that this negatively impacts law abiding users. User experiences matter.

And Jackie Hai looks at what they should be doing.

It’s time to take news to the next level, to a form that not only informs and educates, but also has strong replay value. Then, and only then, will people be willing to pay for it.

They shoot – they score!

PHP Freelancer