New copyright case on fair use, DMCA & defamation

[paulie_smith1]

<p>The U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals has breathed new life into a copyright infringement action by

photographer Peter Murphy against radio shock jocks. The action involves interesting questions of fair use,

DMCA violations, and defamation. <br>

The opinion may be found at: &

n

bsp

; ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/102163p.pdf</p>

<p>You will have to add in t

he htt

[daverhaas]

<p>What I find interesting is that from a legal view - the appelette court basically said to the judge "You got this really wrong, go back and do your job right, and don't bother us again" - which is really rare in American judicial circles. Although this is the 2nd time this year that I've seen that happen. NFL vs NFLPA was the other - where the appeals judges basically told the ruling judge that you got it wrong... But even that was different - judges in that appeal said we're not returning it to you to fix - we'll fix it - you're done with it.</p>

<p>Case itself seems to center on 1) did they give appropriate credit to the photographer? 2) did they have license to use the photos on their site? 3) did they in fact berate the photographer after he requested payment, recognition or removal? As to point 3 - come on - they're shock jocks - what do you expect them to do when you get them mad? curl up in the fetal position? nope - they're firing back....Not saying I agree with their opinions or statements - just saying - that it is kind of like letting a baby play with a pit bull... no good can come from it.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

<p> </p>

[dhbebb]

<p>My first thought is that it apparently takes incredible persistence (2006 to date) for a photographer to assert his rights in what looks like an open-and-shut case where a picture was used for far more than the purpose orginally agreed with the supplier and not credited. I really cannot agree that the photographer must expect personal abuse if he attempts to secure what is rightfully his - this case is morally and legally no different from a situation in which the DJs go to a restaurant, eat a meal, refuse to pay and swear at the staff when asked for money. Even after 5 years, this part of the complaint seems not to have been resolved. An object lesson in what may happen if you take on an opponent who thinks he has deeper pockets and more power than you do!</p>