Copyright Office Broadens DMCA Exemption for Filmmakers
Ripping of protected videos will be allowed for all films, not just documentaries, if the clip has biographical or historic significance.
October 31, 2018 at 10:09 PM
2 minute read
|
Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) exemptions aren't just for documentary filmmakers anymore. The U.S. Copyright Office and Library of Congress last week broadened a DMCA exception to now allow more filmmakers to circumvent anti-copying technology and rip short video clips for purposes of commentary and criticism.
The DMCA criminalizes the hacking of copyrighted books, movies, video games and computer software. But every three years the Copyright Office updates a list of exemptions for legitimate non-infringing uses, such as “jailbreaking” an iPhone to add third-party software.
“This is huge for the independent film industry,” said Michael Donaldson, an attorney who argued for expanding the exemption before the Copyright Office, in a written statement. “The use of fair use material by narrative filmmakers has exponentially increased to the point where expanding the exemption to fiction films was absolutely necessary.”
Donaldson + Callif partner Chris Perez said Wednesday that the firm has been working on broadening the exemption since 2012. They were helped by a boom in dramatic films that use actors to tell a true story, such as the 2014 Cesar Chavez biopic. Many such films have been adding short, historical video clips to underscore the truth of the narrative.
“It's been a long time coming,” Perez said. During previous attempts to expand the exemption, “we just didn't have as many stories to tell the Copyright Office.”
Donaldson + Callif handles a range of transactions for filmmakers and production companies, including IP rights clearances. They teamed with professor Jack Lerner, director of the Intellectual Property, Arts and Technology Clinic at UC-Irvine, in their presentation to the Copyright Office.
The new rule shifts the emphasis from the type of film to the purpose of the clip. Only clips used for parody or their “biographical or historically significant nature” are entitled to the exemption. The exemption is premised on the fair use defense to copyright infringement.
Perez said limiting the exemption to documentaries was problematic in part because there's no universally agreed-upon definition of what a documentary is. The new rule is “not perfect in our eyes,” he said, “but it covers a lot more filmmakers than it did before.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMeta Seeks Declaratory Judgment in VR Eyewear Tech Patent Infringement Case
Plaintiffs Seek to Avoid Jurisdiction Fight in IVF Case, Challenge CooperSurgical in Connecticut
4 minute readPorsche's Venture Capital Arm Adds General Counsel From Clifford Chance
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250