Does news clips fall under "Fair Use" protection?

Jay Rodriguez

Jay Rodriguez

Coffee Member
I'm working on a documentary and have a 9 second long "FOX News" clip in there.

The video clip is used to reinforce a statistic on plastic surgery amongst teens.

Is that Fair Use?

Disclaimer: I'm aware that Fair Use still doesn't guarantee protection.
 
Jay Rodriguez said:
I'm working on a documentary and have a 9 second long "FOX News" clip in there.

The video clip is used to reinforce a statistic on plastic surgery amongst teens.

Is that Fair Use?

Disclaimer: I'm aware that Fair Use still doesn't guarantee protection.
Click to expand...

Having spent many of my years in the business making documentary material for networks and governments, we have used public domain network material many times and have been advised that because it is in the public domain it can be used under the classification "Copyright Protection in Derivative Works". Maybe worth looking at. The actual parra is as follows:

"Copyright Protection in Derivative Works

The copyright in a derivative work covers only the additions, changes, or other new material appearing for the first time in the work. Protection does not extend to any preexisting material, that is, previously published or previously registered works or works in the public domain or owned by a third party. As a result, it is not possible to extend the length of protection for a copyrighted work by creating a derivative work. A work that has fallen into the public domain, that is, a work that is no longer protected by copyright, is also an underlying “work” from which derivative authorship may be added, but the copyright in the derivative work will not extend to the public domain material, and the use of the public domain material in a derivative work will not prevent anyone else from using the same public domain work for another derivative work."

The above information comes from the US copyright authorities "Copyright in Derivative Works and Compilations" Circular 14 which can be found below:

Good luck going forward with it.

Chris Young

https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.pdf
 
cyvideo said:
Having spent many of my years in the business making documentary material for networks and governments, we have used public domain network material many times and have been advised that because it is in the public domain it can be used under the classification "Copyright Protection in Derivative Works". Maybe worth looking at. The actual parra is as follows:

"Copyright Protection in Derivative Works

The copyright in a derivative work covers only the additions, changes, or other new material appearing for the first time in the work. Protection does not extend to any preexisting material, that is, previously published or previously registered works or works in the public domain or owned by a third party. As a result, it is not possible to extend the length of protection for a copyrighted work by creating a derivative work. A work that has fallen into the public domain, that is, a work that is no longer protected by copyright, is also an underlying “work” from which derivative authorship may be added, but the copyright in the derivative work will not extend to the public domain material, and the use of the public domain material in a derivative work will not prevent anyone else from using the same public domain work for another derivative work."

The above information comes from the US copyright authorities "Copyright in Derivative Works and Compilations" Circular 14 which can be found below:

Good luck going forward with it.

Chris Young

https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.pdf
Click to expand...

Thanks so much for chiming in on this topic, I’m curious though, in your experience how and when does network news become public domain?
 
The thing is that it is the clip itself that's the point - you're using it as evidence but the clip is based on a third party - one step away. Perhaps they'd argue their clip is fair use of a subject, but fair use of fair use rather means their editorial decision is what you are using. My test is always what would Judy Judy say? Her decisions are always based on plain common sense and the obvious, backed up with law. Would your use of this footage pass the test, or would she say you were trying to use to for free, finding a legal remedy to something you alrady know, but hope to avoid. Fox aren't exactly short of money to fight it? Fair Use - is this one fair? I suspect people would see through it. A judge certainly would.
 
In documentary production, you are usually informing and reporting something to the public. In the process of this work, you are working as a journalist. You are journalizing a series of events using a visual medium. On the basis of your outlined use of the material, "events of public interest, in service of public knowledge" I think you will find this covers you:

"This document is a statement of principles to help journalists in the United States
interpret the copyright doctrine of fair use. It is intended for anyone who engages
in the set of practices that entails creating media of any kind that refers to real-life
events of public interest, in service of public knowledge, whether that person is a
full-time professional or an individual who takes it upon himself or herself to report
about specific issues or events. In other words, the definition of “journalism” to
which this document speaks is defined by acts, not titles, and is an inclusive one."

This is explained in the following document from The Center of Social Media, Washington College Of Law. The document is titled, "SET OF PRINCIPLES IN FAIR USE FOR JOURNALISM." You can find it linked to below:

Good luck again!

Chris Young

https://www.wcl.american.edu/index.cfm?LinkServID=48909486-C7BE-0D76-146B0CECC8F293E5
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top