I don't think that thumbnail CD covers really have any great value on the whole, and I think a court would be very suspicious of someone saying that the sheer number of thumbnails somehow made what was a set of separate "fair uses" into a massive, singular "unfair use". But I could of course be wrong, but that's my feeling on it.
FF
On 1/18/06, Justin Cormack justin@specialbusservice.com wrote:
On 18 Jan 2006, at 14:55, Fastfission wrote:
I'm not sure about this. If it is fair use in one instance, it should be fair use in all instances. I don't think there is a legal difference between having one fair use magazine cover and having 200, providing each use meets the fair use standards. In cases where multiple-sources from a single copyright holder were held not to be fair use (i.e. Twin Peaks) it was because the sum collection of the uses really did take away from the use of the original source (i.e. was basically a detailed plot abridgment and could be read without watching the shows). I don't think that's the same thing as using a large number of completely separate magazine or DVD covers. At least, that's my understanding of it.
Copying will always be considered by the court __as a whole__. Thats very clear.
With magazine covers, if we had say downloaded (made up example; I havent looked into where they came from) the Official Playboy Magazine Cover website and stuck them all in wikipedia then we would be liable - we would be taking advertising revenue from their website thus causing damages. Regardless of the amount of important critical commentary we make on them.
CD covers even in thumbnail form now have commercial value en masse, for marketing purposes.
Of course there isnt much case law yet, anything could happen. IANAL. I expect we shall hear from a lawyer soon.
Justinc
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l