[mythtv-users] Boxee/Hulu?

diane mittnik dianemittnik at gmail.com
Mon Feb 23 14:33:09 UTC 2009


On 2/21/09, David Brodbeck <gull at gull.us> wrote:
> Nick Rout wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:18 AM, Bill Williamson <bill at bbqninja.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Don't forget that ANYONE using mythtv to record a MLB baseball game is
>>> violating the implied license they state at the beginning of each and
>>> every
>>> baseball game.

No, time shifting is legal in the US.  Collecting and displaying stats
is legal.  Playing back recordings of games for educational purposes
is legal.  Whether you can afford to defend a lawsuit if you report
scores during or immediately after a game otoh... or how/where/when
you display stats...

It's the same as the stupid copyright paragraph the NYT sticks into
the "print" page of an article, so that when you print the article you
are  not only carrying around the article, but the ugly copyright
paragraph at the top left corner which means nothing if the printout
is for your personal or educational use.  Or the copyright
prohibition(s) put on every news story from the "wires" (AP, AFP,
Breitbart, others).  They may wish it, but they can't change the
limited rights granted to end users and educational institutions under
copyright law.

MLB, NFL, Ping Pong championships...they can append all the copyright
restrictions they want to the end of their programs, US residents
still have rights within copyright law and because of the Sony Betamax
decision that allows for time shifting, printing out, probably screen
shots, probably mixing, definitely educational uses, etc.

For something printed (or even in the case of video), where it may get
murky (if there is no court case to guide), is if I print something
out and mail it to my cousin or classmate and he uses it in his
report, is the act of transferring legal?  Would the legality of the
act of transferring be contingent on whether the end use (scrap book
or distribution to restaurant customers, ie: a review,) is legal or
not?  What about a time shifted video?  If I record an episode of
Happy Days, that time shift is legal.  Is it legal if it is on a VCR
tape and I physically take the tape to my friend's house and watch it
together with her? What about if I take it there, but have to leave
and only she watches it?  What about if I mail it to her and we watch
it together the next time I come over?  Or only she watches it?  What
about, instead of on a VCR tape, I record it to hard drive, watch it,
then physically bring the hard drive to her house and we watch it
together?  What about if I mail the hard drive?  What about if I send
the episode to her via an attachment to an email?  Or make it
available only to her ip address, blocking all other ip addresses, and
let her download/copy it via a browser?  Or via a P2P app?

>>
>> I don't know what restrictions MLB try to place, but in NZ we have a
>> (limited) statutory right to timeshift.

Same here, see above.

> My guess is if MLB tried to enforce their license against someone who
> was doing timeshifting, they'd lose because of the Betamax precedent,
> which basically ruled that timeshifting is fair use.  But IANAL.

Yes, and you don't have to be a lawyer to understand this. But can you
afford the lawsuit?

> I've never heard of them going after a home user, but I know that the
> NFL enforces the prohibition on public performances.  They've sent
> cease-and-desist letters to church groups who were having Super Bowl
> parties, for example.

Except last Superbowl (broadcast in 2008), the NFL made the mistake of
sending out warning notices about public performances to church
groups, and they (church groups) brought it to the attention of at
least one local Senator.  It blew up in the NFL's face because the
church groups that went public with the Senator were minority church
groups and they framed it (at least partially) as keeping troubled
youth off the streets for at least one Sunday, and perhaps getting
them into church longer (recruiting tool).  The Senator was joined by
one or two of his colleagues, and they said that if churches weren't
allowed to play the Superbowl without paying hefty fees to the NFL (as
they already believed the churches were allowed to freely play), then
legislation may be necessary to allow it.  Within 24 hours of the
announcement of possible legislation to change copyright law for this
purpose, the NFL publicists went into overdrive and the NFL announced
that it had all been a big misunderstanding, that churches would be
allowed to broadcast the Superbowl.

D.


More information about the mythtv-users mailing list