Would those be the fine folks who violated copyright law and turned Galt's speech into a dramatic presentation without authorization from the copyright holder?
I may be wrong about whether they received permission (and the party you name), but if it's the same guy who was on RoR...
Does copyright law make exceptions for amateur performances for which the performers are not paid? To the best of my knowledge, no.
You raise questions as to the propriety of my project. The copyright issues involved are thorny- I don't own the speech, the dramatization rights, or the underlying rights of the music and film clips I use. For this reason, I have a few guidelines I follow:
1) If any copyright issue is raised, I immediately pull the video and edit out the content in question. 2) If anyone on behalf of Ayn Rand's estate, the holders of the dramatization rights, or the owners of the audiobook performance contact me, the entire project will be immediately scrapped. 3) I don't sell DVDs or any other version of the project. This project brings me spiritual values, not financial. Any money should go the the rights holders. 4) I post the websites and encourage people to buy the book and audiobook, to visit the Ayn Rand Institute, etc- so I am contributing free advertising for the rights holders. 5) I plaster my YouTube website with as many disclaimers as I can not to confuse my work with Ayn Rand's. I'm only a student and a fan. Any misinterpretations of the speech are mine.
Bottom line, I don't have the right to profit for what I'm doing, neither the Legal Right or, in fact, the Moral Right. It's a contradiction for a Objectivist to be violating intellectual property rights even in a small way. If Ayn Rand were alive, she would 'Go Roark' on me. I'm aware of that, and I certainly don't want to get in trouble with anyone. So far, I feel that the value of the work justifies the risks I'm taking- which are small. ARI donates copies of this book around the world for the express purpose of spreading these ideas. I am impatient and I wish to hasten the spread before the world falls apart. The moral lapse is mitigated by my application in the work of the virtues of rationality & productivity, and by my honesty in acknowledging all the above.
7 comments:
Would those be the fine folks who violated copyright law and turned Galt's speech into a dramatic presentation without authorization from the copyright holder?
I may be wrong about whether they received permission (and the party you name), but if it's the same guy who was on RoR...
Does copyright law make exceptions for amateur performances for which the performers are not paid? To the best of my knowledge, no.
Lawyers?
Libertarians don't believe in IP law....
That's right Berend, the Libz don't believe in IP law. Case example? There was a blog post here at Not PC about ticket scalping.
Berend
I am a libertarian and I believe in IP law. Therefore your claim is demonstrably false.
Julian
Frankly, I don't know who did it or what the copyright arrangement is with its production.
I assume copyright has been respected, since YouTube can and do pull anything whose copyright is challenged by the copyright holders.
And Berend, yes they do.
Sure, you'll find anarcho-capitalists and other 'hippies of the right' who don't, but I don't find their arguments at all convincing.
That is to say, I disagree with them. Strongly.
I just saw this person being interviewed on the Hanity's show in Fox News and his book is currently #1 at Amazon. I think that he is Libertarian.
Mark Levin, with his book title: Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto:
There are no "fine folks"- there's just me.
You raise questions as to the propriety of my project. The copyright issues involved are thorny- I don't own the speech, the dramatization rights, or the underlying rights of the music and film clips I use. For this reason, I have a few guidelines I follow:
1) If any copyright issue is raised, I immediately pull the video and edit out the content in question.
2) If anyone on behalf of Ayn Rand's estate, the holders of the dramatization rights, or the owners of the audiobook performance contact me, the entire project will be immediately scrapped.
3) I don't sell DVDs or any other version of the project. This project brings me spiritual values, not financial. Any money should go the the rights holders.
4) I post the websites and encourage people to buy the book and audiobook, to visit the Ayn Rand Institute, etc- so I am contributing free advertising for the rights holders.
5) I plaster my YouTube website with as many disclaimers as I can not to confuse my work with Ayn Rand's. I'm only a student and a fan. Any misinterpretations of the speech are mine.
Bottom line, I don't have the right to profit for what I'm doing, neither the Legal Right or, in fact, the Moral Right. It's a contradiction for a Objectivist to be violating intellectual property rights even in a small way. If Ayn Rand were alive, she would 'Go Roark' on me. I'm aware of that, and I certainly don't want to get in trouble with anyone. So far, I feel that the value of the work justifies the risks I'm taking- which are small. ARI donates copies of this book around the world for the express purpose of spreading these ideas. I am impatient and I wish to hasten the spread before the world falls apart. The moral lapse is mitigated by my application in the work of the virtues of rationality & productivity, and by my honesty in acknowledging all the above.
-xcowboy2
Post a Comment