Comments by "craxd1" (@craxd1) on "Pinterest Files Privacy Complaint to Take Down Tim Poole Video About their Bias" video.

  1. The corporations think that they are going to narrow the way copyright and fair use works, which is an attack on the freedom of speech, thinking that nobody will challenge them. In my opinion, I believe that the teeth of copyright law should be lessened from what it is, especially about how long one can claim a copyright. It should be brought in line with the time limits on patents. However, a Copyright does not grant one proprietary rights as does a patent. "In United States copyright law, transformation is a possible justification that use of a copyrighted work may qualify as fair use, i.e., that a certain use of a work does not infringe its holder's copyright due to the public interest in the usage. Transformation is an important issue in deciding whether a use meets the first factor of the fair-use test, and is generally critical for determining whether a use is in fact fair, although no one factor is dispositive. " In Folsom v. Marsh. In that case, Justice Story ruled that : "if [someone] thus cites the most important parts of the work, with a view, not to criticize, but to supersede the use of the original work, and substitute the review for it, such a use will be deemed in law a piracy." In other words, the article shown or quoted must be transformed into something else, or be critiqued. Also, "the idea–expression divide or idea–expression dichotomy limits the scope of copyright protection by differentiating an idea from the expression or manifestation of that idea." "In the United States the 1879 opinion of the Supreme Court in the case of Baker v. Selden[4] elaborated this doctrine, holding that, while exclusive rights to the "useful arts" (in this case bookkeeping) described in a book might be available by patent, only the description itself was protectable by copyright. In Harper & Row Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enters., 471 U.S. 539, 556 (1985), the Supreme Court stated that "copyright's idea/expression dichotomy 'strike[s] a definitional balance between the First Amendment and the Copyright Act by permitting free communication of facts while still protecting an author's expression.'" (internal citation omitted). Additionally, in Mazer v. Stein, 347 U.S. 201, 217 (1954), the Supreme Court stated "Unlike a patent, a copyright gives no exclusive right to the art disclosed; protection is given only to the expression of the idea—not the idea itself."" "In the Australian decision of Victoria Park Racing and Recreation Grounds Co. Ltd v. Taylor (1937) 58 CLR 479 at 498, Latham CJ used the analogy of reporting a person's fall from a bus: the first person to do so could not use the law of copyright to stop other people from announcing this fact." Quoted from Wikipedia. https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/
    1