From CSEP590TU
Jump to: navigation, search

590TU Discussion

Welcome to the Discussion Page for CSE590TU. This is for general comments and announcements for the class. If you have a comment on a specific topic or lecture, please visit the lecture-specific page. Please use the + sign in the top of the screen to add comments to the page.

Talk on Does IT Matter for MS Employees

Nicholas Carr will be speaking on Does IT Matter on Thursday, Nov 4 in 113/1021. [apardoe]

IT Worker Demand and Outsourcing

I moved this thread to the "Outsourcing and its impact on innovation?" project idea discussion page so that we can concentrate the discussion on the impact of outsourcing in one place.

Fair use: parody vs. satire

(This is about a reading for lecture 4, but there isn't a section for that yet ...)

The "fair use" section in Ch. 7 of Chasing Moore's Law mentions satire as an example of such. Did they mean parody? I first learned there was a distinction a couple weeks back when JibJab's This Land (Sue You: This Song Is Our Song [1]) was released. From what I understand, a parody uses the source material to comment on the source material. A satire uses the source material to comment on something else.

I am a little confused on what is fair use, though. I think parody is always fair use. From what I heard around JibJab's case, satire is never fair use. Searching on [2], I got the impression that there was no meaningful distinction. Wikipedia [3] suggests that satire can be fair use [4], depending on circumstances, but has a tougher burden of proof because "the satirist's ideas are capable of expression without the use of the other particular work" [5].

So when, if ever, is satire fair use?

Jim Jantos: It is my understanding that parody takes aim at the copyrighted work, while satire borrows from the copyrighted work but aims at some other target.

There is no presumption of fair use with respect to parody or satire. Based on the result of the Supreme Court case Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. ("Oh Pretty Woman" Roy Orbison song parodied by 2 Live Crew - Supreme Court held: fair use), one may conclude that all transformative parody will likely be deemed fair use under section 107. However, the Supreme Court emphasized that parodies are not entitled to a fair use presumption and that each fair use factor under section 107 must be analyzed based on the context of the situation.

Therefore, the fair use implications of parody and satire must be made on a case by case basis analyzing the four fair use factors of Section 107: (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purpose; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Looking at the factors, parody requires the original copyrighted work to make its point by defininition, and therefore a parody has a basis to use the original work. However, satire theoretically can stand on its own without the copyrighted work, which requires some justification for the act of using the copyrighted work in the first instance.

IT & Health care

Here is an op-ed piece in the Washington Post by Senators Bill Frist and Hillary Clinton about How to Heal Health Care. (They encourage the use of IT.)

Can others attend the Carr talk at MSFT?