Your own website proves my point:

6. It is legal to copy or distribute a work if you do not copy all of it.
Maybe, but it depends on what you do. Under the fair use doctrine of the U.S. copyright statute, it is permissible to use limited portions of a work including quotes, for purposes such as commentary, criticism, news reporting, and scholarly reports. There are no legal rules permitting the use of a specific number of words, a certain number of musical notes, or percentages of a work. Whether a particular use qualifies as fair use depends on all the circumstances. See Circular 21 and FL 102.

That's not Mark's website - he just linked to it.

At the end of the day, I suppose (sadly) it's what you can get away with that counts.
Personally, if saw any of my work used by someone else I woud want to sue their ass off uness I had been approached and given permission. The main reason is that it's unlikely they would be able to anything better with it than I had and therefore it just comes off looking worse - and that would annoy me. (An arrogant point of view, but that's me)

And also - stealing is stealing, whether it's a can of beans, ten million quid, or five minute of vdeo that someone spent alot of time and effort producing.

__________________
www.playpauseclick.com

God i hate when people take stuff out of context i never said it was HIS website i jsut meant that the wesite he found proves my point and legally im it fine im not kidding. Go look up the law it 5minutes for movies and 3 minutes per artist in any piece of work. I dont care if anyone thinks im wrong because ive seen it word for word.

God I hate it when poeple I am trying to help argue.

This isnt 'something awful' - we dont argue for fun here, we try to share knowledge for the good of all.

" commentary, criticism, news reporting, and scholarly reports "

Right then - your film does not come under these headings.

Copyright may not apply for short clips where thier use is seen as being in the public interest.

For example - a news report that plays ' teenage suicide ' in connection with a wave of teenage suicides possibly caused by the tune would be seen as fair use - clearly it is in the public interst to report this.

However if i used ' my cabbage is wilting ' in a film on my own website about that tune making my cabbages sad, even tho I might cconsidor this news it is very unlikely a judge would see this as in the public interest - so I would need clearence (previous caveats apply).

I would be very suprised if this system is not applied stateside in a similar way - media corps have worked very hard to globalise such things.

As i said this area of the law is hugely complex and this discussion is becoming devisive and uninteresting.

__________________
I have two prejudices - I am anti HDV for consumer camcorders, and I eat mooks who claim to be pro wedding vidders and ask dumb questions.

www.zaskarfilms.com You tube channel 'zaskarfilms'
JVC DV5001e (big cam), Sony PC6E (tiny cam), Vinten pro5, PAG light, SM58, Sony ECM50, Sony C-76, 0.5x convertors for sony, Rode video mic, Vegas 7.

theres a difference between arguing and stating fact. Which is what im doing in any case. Non of this would have happened if the user on page 2 of this thread had just commented on the work and not any legal issue behind it. Copyright law is not why I created this thread. Now unless your gunna comment on the vids on my youtube page that I posted write nothing else. You want to argue some mroe thatn either PM and ill be more than happy to discuss this or make a new thread.