Quote:

---

Originally posted by Lakota:
2.) If you show any Firefly episodes in public (lets say at a theater or an tavern, etc.) for free, are you breaking in laws and do you think Mutant Enemy or anyone else will prosecute? I'm asking because there have been Firefly parties and viewings in the past and I was wondering if anything was said and done?

I would like to hear your opinions please.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Phaedra:
Caveat
I am not a lawyer! I passed the California Bar (that was bitch), but I have not been sworn in and thus am not admitted to practice in any state. I did graduate top third from my fancy law school (hey its not top 3%, but it's nothing to sneeze at) and currently co-teach Constitutional Law. I actually got a B in Copyright, so this is not my field of expertise. I did a lot better in Criminal Law in spite of my professors penchant for shouting cunnilingus and adressing each question with, "Troubling. . . deeply troubling." But we really didn't discuss
the issues your question raises. So again, no expertise here. I'm just a fan with a fancy degree.

Question Presented

So it sounds to me like you're asking two different but related questions. Let me see if I understand the scenario. If I exhibit Firefly publicly (i.e. in my place of business), but not for profit, can I:

1. Be subject to civil liability for copyright infringement to Mutant Enemy and/or Fox Entertainment?; and

2. Be subject to criminal liability under fed (pun intended) statute?

Short Answers

1. Technically speaking, maybe. I'd have to check my books, but regardless of profit or location (private residence or public fora) individually purchased copyrighted material is intended for the use and enjoyment of owner alone. So for example, if a teacher distributes a copy of an article in a class, they have to recieve the permission of the author and publisher. Conversly, speaking it's your gorram property and you should be able to share it with whom ever you choose. This is really a question of threshold. Does distribution of the material reach the level where it impacts the publisher's/author's interest in the material (i.e. making a profit). Wide distribution cuts into the profits, i.e. this is why Metallica sued and eventually won against Napster (Lars why Lars?). So my unofficial answer is don't get your panties in a bunch. Your not broadcasting over the internet to a large number of people who will then copy the material instead of buying the DVDs. Frankly speaking its not in their economic interest to bust you. It would take to much time, effort and expense. Plus they would have to know and find you first.

2. Pretty much the same answer. The feds proscute people for pirating (that's what that dumb warning is talking about) because large public exhibitions of materials or duplication of material is in theory stealing. But again, they'd have to know, find you and care.

If this is reallly troubling you, get me a copy of the statute you're concerned with (I believe you mean the ubiquitos FBI waring that appears at the begining of every commercially produced tape) and I'll do a little research. I would just go home and copy it down myself, but I'm in the midst of project hell and living out of my office. If you mean a different statute, please send me a copy. The answer may take a while, because again, the godess is punishing me for some unkown reason.

Again, this answer was not given in any official capacity. It is not based on research and does not purport to represent the actual state of the law, only my opinions. To speak plainly, if I'm wrong please don't sue me, I've worked long and hard for my career.

Phaedra (a bad luck name)

---

Quote:

---

WHAT IS COPYRIGHT?

Copyright is a form of protection provided by the laws of the United States (title 17, U.S. Code) to the authors of “original works of authorship,” including literary, dramatic, musical, artistic, and certain other intellectual works. This protection is available to both published and unpublished works. Section 106 of the 1976 Copyright Act generally gives the owner of copyright the exclusive right to do and to authorize others to do the following:

* To reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords;
* To prepare derivative works based upon the work;
* To distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;
* To perform the work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works;
* To display the copyrighted work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work; and
* In the case of sound recordings, to perform the work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission.

In addition, certain authors of works of visual art have the rights of attribution and integrity as described in section 106A of the 1976 Copyright Act. For further information, request Circular 40, “Copyright Registration for Works of the Visual Arts.”

It is illegal for anyone to violate any of the rights provided by the copyright law to the owner of copyright. These rights, however, are not unlimited in scope. Sections 107 through 121 of the 1976 Copyright Act establish limitations on these rights. In some cases, these limitations are specified exemptions from copyright liability. One major limitation is the doctrine of "fair use," which is given a statutory basis in section 107 of the 1976 Copyright Act. In other instances, the limitation takes the form of a "compulsory license" under which certain limited uses of copyrighted works are permitted upon payment of specified royalties and compliance with statutory conditions. For further information about the limitations of any of these rights, consult the copyright law or write to the Copyright Office.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Phaedra:
Caveat
So for example, if a teacher distributes a copy of an article in a class, they have to recieve the permission of the author and publisher.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Phaedra:
Caveat
So for example, if a teacher distributes a copy of an article in a class, they have to recieve the permission of the author and publisher.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
I know they have had movie rooms at sci-fi conventions (public venue, entrance/membership fees), and I have never heard of any of them prosecuted.

...snip...

Doesn't mean it is necessarily right or legal. Just means you can get away with it, even in public exhibitions.

---