Defining Fair Use on YouTube: A Guide to Modern Copyright
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47611/jsrhs.v10i4.2220Keywords:
Fair Use, YouTube, Copyright Law, Intellectual Property, Content IDAbstract
Copyright law is a large, complex issue that has found itself at the center of controversy on YouTube. Much of the debate around copyright centers on whether a video is fair use, the exception to copyright laws. There are large problems on YouTube surrounding the exploitation of the Content ID system, and the solutions to these problems often rely on the assumption of clear and defined copyright law, which is far from the case. This led my research into finding out based on the case law, what constitutes fair use on YouTube? Using a content analysis, these complexities of copyright law were able to be broken down into easy-to-understand guidelines. To do this, roughly 30 cases were found using the websites case.law and copyright.gov, and the decision of the case and the reasoning behind it were pulled out to create guidelines based on the copyright case law of court decisions. These guidelines consist of having a license for the copyrighted content, using the content for education, criticism or review, providing significant commentary to shift the focus away from the content, using the content for parody, changing the purpose of the content, or using an insignificant portion of the content. If any of these scenarios are met, then the video will likely not violate copyright. The use of these guidelines could be implemented into YouTubes algorithm, but more likely these guidelines would be easy to follow for creators to know whether or not their video will violate copyright.
Downloads
References or Bibliography
Bartholomew, T. (2015). The death of fair use in cyberspace: YouTube and the problem with Content ID. Duke Law and Technology Review, 13(1), 66-88.
Brown, B. (2008). Fortifying the safe harbors: Reevaluating the DMCA in a web 2.0 world. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 23(473), 437-468.
Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569, 127 L. Ed. 2d 500, 114 S. Ct. 1164 (1994)
Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § Section 107 (1976)
Guzman, F. (2015). The tension between derivative works online protected by fair use and the takedown provisions of the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act. Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property, 13(2), 180-196.
Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, 276 F. Supp. 3d 34 (2017)
Marfo, N. (2019). Playing fair: YouTube, Nintendo, and the lost balance of online fair use. Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law, 13(1), 456-489.
McGucken v. Newsweek LLC 19 Civ. 9617 (KPF), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96126 (S.D.N.Y. June 1, 2020)
Monster Communications, Inc. v. Turner Broadcasting Sys. Inc., 935 F.Supp. 490 (S.D. N.Y., 1996)
Ringgold v. Black Entertainment Television, Inc., 126 F.3d 70 (2d Cir. 1997)
Roy Export Co. Estab. of Vaduz v. Columbia Broadcasting Sys., Inc., 672 F.2d 1095, 1100 (2d Cir. 1982)
SOFA Entertainment, Inc. v. Dodger Productions, Inc., No. 2:08-cv-02616 (9th Cir. Mar. 11, 2013)
Solomon, Leron (2015) "Fair Users or Content Abusers? The Automatic Flagging of Non-Infringing Videos by Content ID on YouTube," Hofstra Law Review: Vol. 44: Iss. 1, Article 8.
Teller v. Dogge, 8 F. Supp. 3d 1228 (2014)
Vogele, J. (2017). Where's the fair use? The takedown of let's play and reaction videos on YouTube and the need for comprehensive DMCA reform. Touro Law Review, 33(2), 589-632.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2021 Cole Scott
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright holder(s) granted JSR a perpetual, non-exclusive license to distriute & display this article.
