Posted by Donna Wentworth

I'm a little confused. Why did he actually pay the $350? 22 words is hardly copyright infringement. In fact, this seems like a clear example of fair use. Rather, I think the guy simply got screwed by Warner and their legion of form licensing people. Scare tactics often work. It's still a shame though.

Permalink to Comment

Has anybody emailed this to Radiohead yet?

Permalink to Comment

Chris Turner, Radiohead and Copyright from The Adventures of Accordion Guy in the 21st Century :: Joey deVilla's Weblog (I wasn't going to post until tonight, but Wendy told me that the story I'm about to tell appeared on Copyfight. I'm not... [Read More]

Tracked on November 22, 2004 01:40 PM

WB Says You'll Pay from MaisonBisson.com Here's the irony: an academic writes a paper that references and quotes relevant prior work, and is commended for the work. But, a journalist working on a book that quotes [Read More]

Tracked on November 23, 2004 02:53 PM

87 words for $350 from A. S. Bradbury's Blog Copyfight links to an article by an author who had to pay $350 to quote 87 words from Radiohead songs in his book. This amounts to $4.02 a word. Surely this is the sort of usage - quotes of about 20-40 words - that should be fair use in this context, i... [Read More]

Tracked on November 24, 2004 05:24 PM

Why Did They Have To Ruin A Perfectly Serviceable Book-Tour Story With All That Fruity Vacationing? from Planet Simpson It occurs to me that some - perhaps both - of the regular visitors to this site who don't know its proprietors personally might be wondering what the deal is with this blog. For example, if you've landed here via one of the growing number of links to t... [Read More]

Tracked on November 26, 2004 11:29 AM

POST A COMMENT

Name:

Email:

URL:

Comments:

Remember personal info? YesNo

EMAIL THIS ENTRY TO A FRIEND

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):