geni wrote:
So we cannot address the question of whether trailers are the same or a different product, since this is not addressed directly in statute law, but only addressed or partially addressed in case law.
In that case, I would lean toward adding no additional interpretations on our part, and letting the case law determine the situation
There is no additional interpretation. As statute law is written screen shots of trailers published before their respective films without copyright notices are PD. There are some possible exceptions but given what we use them for we are unlikely to trigger them (say a copyrighted painting appeared in the trailer).
Except for time-expired copyrights, I doubt that the trailers are PD, but they clearly come under fair use. If one considers that they were published in the first place for free distribution, showing them does not diminish the producer's revenue within the meaning of the fourth factor of fair use. Their purpose was a marketting one to encourage the public to see the whole film.
Ec