YouTube ‘Dancing Baby’ Copyright Ruling Sets Fair Use
Guideline
By BEN SISARIO SEPT. 14, 2015
In February 2007, Stephanie Lenz, a mother in Gallitzin,
Pa., went on YouTube and uploaded a 29-second video of her toddler dancing
while Prince’s song “Let’s Go Crazy” played in the background.
Prince’s publishers objected, Ms. Lenz filed a lawsuit,
and for more than eight years the case has been symbolic of the clashes over
copyright online.
On Monday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit, in San Francisco, cleared the way for the case to go to trial, and set
a guideline that may change the way media companies police their holdings
online. In its decision, the three-judge panel ruled that copyright holders
must consider fair use before asking services like YouTube to remove videos
that include material they control.
The suit, known as the “dancing baby” case, has become
famous for its focus on the kind of Internet activity that millions of ordinary
people engage in, posting candid videos of family and friends that may only
incidentally include copyrighted media like songs. The Electronic Frontier
Foundation, an advocacy group that represented Ms. Lenz in her lawsuit against
Universal, called the judges’ decision a victory for Internet users.
“Today’s ruling sends a strong message that copyright law
does not authorize thoughtless censorship of lawful speech,” Corynne McSherry,
the foundation’s legal director, said in a statement.
A spokesman for the Recording Industry Association of
America, Jonathan Lamy, said, “We respectfully disagree with the court’s
conclusion about the D.M.C.A. and the burden the court places upon copyright
holders before sending takedown notices,” referring to the 1998 Digital
Millennium Copyright Act.
In her suit, Ms. Lenz argued that her use of Prince’s
music was protected by fair use, which allows the use of copyrighted material
under certain conditions like commentary, criticism or news reporting.
The case also came to represent the split between
Hollywood and Silicon Valley over copyright.
The Motion Picture Association of America and the
R.I.A.A. both supported Universal, which argued that fair use should be
considered an “affirmative defense” only when part of an infringement suit. On
the other side of the issue, Google, Twitter and Tumblr rallied behind Ms.
Lenz.
The judges ruled that fair use was “uniquely situated in
copyright law so as to be treated differently than traditional affirmative
defenses,” and copyright holders like Universal must consider fair use before
issuing takedown notices.
Even paying “lip service” to the consideration of fair
use is not enough, and could expose a copyright holder to liability, the judges
ruled.
A version of this article appears in print on September
15, 2015, on page B2 of the New York edition with the headline:
Comments
Post a Comment