Warner Bros. Cartoon Releases – Warner Brothers. I love it when I find someone who has put together a collection like this. This is a filmogrpahy of the Warner Brothers cartoons from 1929-1964. Good stuff.
0
Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
Amazing collection. He should be expecting a cease and desist letter from Warner Bros. any day now for his unlicensed derivative work.
Unless he does have a license? Although I do doubt it. 🙂
But, per a recent, previous blog-entry – anything after 1922 has had copyright coverage extended.
Shouldn’t it fall under fair-use – since he is only using the title-cards, and not the entire “work”?
License? You’re doubts are well-placed. As it says on the site, “This site is neither sponsored nor authorized by Warner Bros.” So, no license.
And when did being in the right ever stop a C&D letter? I kid … (but it is true)
Whether Mackey’s use would be considered “fair-use”, I think is tough to say. If one were WB, one could say that his comprehensive site undermine’s the market for a book on the title-cards or related text. No one would ever buy the book that WB might put out because this guy’s stuff is so good.
And if you think that WB would never bother with a book about this stuff, the WB could point out that a book on this topic would clearly generate interest because (1) the guy made the website, and (2) at least one prominent person (Dvorak) linked to it.
But who knows? Worse cases have been filed.
Good points.
I had assumed that “fair use” would be applicable, since there is no attempt at monetary gain from the use.
But, if “undermining the market” for a similar, for-profit work by WB has legal precedent..?
I hadn’t considered that, as I have no experience in such matters.
Yes, fair-use would likely be an available defense to claims of infringement, and that defense would be aided by the fact that it was not-for-profit (or apparently any monetary gain at all), but it wouldn’t be sufficient to successfully establish that defense by itself.
I think it’s a tough call. That website doesn’t fall into a “classic” case of fair-use.
And, for those that care, here are the 4 fair-use factors:
1. What is the character of the use?
2. What is the nature of the work to be used?
3. How much of the work will you use?
4. What effect would this use have on the market for the original or for permissions if the use were widespread?
While the 4th factor has historically been the most important, recently I’ve read that courts are saying that all four should be treated equally. I don’t know if that’s true in practice.
Thanks for the info, I wasn’t familiar with the fair use “factors”.
#4 was interesting, since I frequently see a related issue – in fan-subbed anime. It is broadcast in Japan; and fans record them, add subtitles, and re-distrubute them. Most of these “fan-subs” have a notice included, near the beginning, to “please stop distribution if/when the show is licenced for distribution (in the U.S.)”.
I have often wondered if that is too little, too late – per #4? Some shows are never licenced – and some (most?) sites do stop offering licensed shows – but how much has the market for the show been reduced? How many of the shows never licensed, aren’t licensed because of the perceived fan-sub reduction in demand for commercial releases?
John, perhaps you can take on Warner Bros, if SCO can take on IBM. Lrt’s turn this copyright thing around.