What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Adam Lambert sings the 2012 theme song, “Time for Miracles” view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Watch the Adam Lambert music video for the 2012 theme song. See 2012, in theaters Nov 13
19 Comments
- echolalia, on 10/10/2007, -0/+22This reminds me of when the NFL threatened to sue when churches had superbowl parties, because they were showing it on a screen that was bigger than 55 inches, which makes it illegal under the NFL's copyright rules.
That just doesn't make sense. I've got a 60 inch tv and I'm scared to use it. - Anrkist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10"The leagues and studios named are certain to fight the complaint tooth and nail, as their actions have demonstrated that they prefer consumers to remain in the dark about their fair use rights." - Sadly, this article left me in the dark as well. What are my fair use rights for this content?
Side Note: The word "disseminated" has always scared me. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6I've always wondered why other shows didn't say "you can't use this without the express written consent of fox 11 news" or whatever at the end of them.
- Bawk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Does this mean we can finally watch some god damn Daily Show clips on youtube again?
- Mittop, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4You can check out this useful FAQ at the EFF. http://www.eff.org/IP/eff_fair_use_faq.php
Hope you find that useful! :) - guyinthechair, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5FTC != FCC
- fuzzynyanko, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I kinda agree. If I owned a restaurant open on Super Bowl Sunday, it's just common sense to bring in a TV and have the game on.
- clickmyface, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I did notice that on our Mariners games they say "may not be reproduced or retransmitted in any form, and the accounts and descriptions of this game may not be disseminated without express written consent from the Seattle Mariners." Before it use to be "written consent of Major League Baseball."
Either way, MLB, $340,000 tax dollars paid for Safeco field so I think we can talk about what goes on inside the park with whomever we want. - Uranium118, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1What if you quote the entire work?
So that would be like fourty 30 sec clips one after the other. - WhiteRaven, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You are just WRONG. How can you take the words "private use" and construe that to ONLY mean "viewing"? Discussion after the fact IS private use.
The words are "Any other use" which means that *everything* that falls under the umbrella of "private use" is allowed. So, if you give a *private* account of the game to a few friends, you are safe. If you make an account public, such as posting to a web forum or writing a newspaper article, the NFL has the option of taking action. - geekee, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It's not fair use if an entire segment is shown. A 30 sec clip is ok, however. Think about the difference between citing references and plagiarizing in writing, and you'll get the idea.
- Drahkar, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I'll find it more useful when the FTC does the same thing against the MPAA and the RIAA. They need to go after the real Piraters, the people overseas trying to make money off it, not people at home just trying to play it on all their devices. Sure there are some pirates here, but not nearly as many as they would make it out to be.
- AxeSwinger, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1RTFA:
"This telecast is copyrighted by the NFL for the private use of our audience. Any other use of this telecast or any pictures, descriptions, or accounts of the game without the NFL's consent is prohibited."
The telecast is for private use, or viewing, post telecast discussion would be covered under the following portion: "Any other use of this telecast or any pictures, descriptions, or accounts of the game without the NFL's consent is prohibited".
As I stated above if you take the statement as it is written you can not discuss the game. Which is positively ridiculous. - ucbmoose, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1See that ship over there? They’re re-broadcasting Major League Baseball with implied oral consent, not express written consent.
- AxeSwinger, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You're a moron. If you take the notice for nothing more than as it is stated you cannot talk about the game with someone or even discuss the score. How is that solid ground especially when it's broadcast over public airways. If they want that type of lock on their content they should not be telecasting it at all and then we'll see how long they stay in business when fans are unable to view the games.
- dakboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It wasn't just the size of the screens, it was the number of people. 55" or more AND more than 12 people, and you're considered to be showing it for "commercial gain" or something stupid like that.
- WhiteRaven, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Discussing the game falls under "private use".
- WhiteRaven, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I think the NFL and company are on solid ground. They acknowledge "fair use" by stipulating that it's audience has the right to use it privately.
- Dannyo01, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Fans can file their own complaints with the FTC by going to the website...
http://www.defendfairuse.org/
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is