[rumori] Re: sampling laws

Steev [rumori] Re: sampling laws
Wed, 11 Nov 1998 09:39:30 -0800 (PST) (00910805970, Pine.LNX.4.05.9811110936380.247-100000atflotsam.detritus.net)

this bounced to me - majordomo is a little too zealous sometimes and didnt
like that fact that the word "c-a-n-c-e-l" was in the message.
but anyway, thanx, jeff, this is really useful info!


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 09:32:04 -0800
From: owner-rumoriatdetritus.net
To: owner-rumoriatdetritus.net
Subject: BOUNCE rumoriatdetritus.net: Admin request of type /\bcancel\b/i at
line 7

>From steev Wed Nov 11 09:32:02 1998
To: rumoriatdetritus.net
Subject: Re: [rumori] Re: sampling laws
Message-ID: <Pine.A41.3.95L.981111120536.98396A-100000atlogin1.isis.unc.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

> 2) recently, the engineer at radio K, the college radio station at which I am
> the production director, asked me to consider the risk I was taking for the
> station by releasing a cd which I produced at the station during my free
> and the lawyers finally figured out they could get no money from me, would
> they perhaps approach the station? I've included nowhere on the packaging the
> fact that I've mixed it there, but aside from this fact which seems to cancl
> out any reason to fear, the basic question remains. If the RIAA is going
> after the disc manufacturers, where does it stop? Can they sue Macintosh
> for providing sound editing programs? What about the manufacturers of
> open reel tape recorders and razor blades?

Is your station in the USA? If so, you can tell your engineer he has
nothing to worry about.

There's a doctrine under US copyright law called "vicarious infringement" that can be applied to third parties who indirectly participate in someone
else's infringement. Examples of such third parties could be: pressing
plants, flea markets, on-line services, et al. (This is the doctrine
under which the RIAA was threatening Negativland's pressing plant.)

However, for the third party to be liable, it must derive "direct financial interest in the exploitation of [the] copyrighted materials" Clearly, Station K will not be benefiting from your work in any way; you
are not paying them for the use of station equipment and their name is
absent from the CD packaging.

(Macintosh, Gillette, and Ampex also have little to fear because vicarious
infringement also requires that the third party have "control" over the premises where the infringement takes place.)

Jeff R.

for more on vicarious copyright infringement, see
http://www.bccb.com/NewslIntellectualPropertyF96.html http://vls.law.vill.edu/students/orgs/sports/vol4iss1/Dean.htm