Sentences with phrase «not fair use»

Generally, using an entire song in a film, even if it is not intended to make much money, is not fair use.

On another note, The Recorder reports (for subscribers only) that lawyers from Morrison & Foerster and Boies, Schiller & Flexner are still working for Oracle on this matter, but Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, whose appellate team (led by Joshua Rosenkranz) had achieved the reversal of the non-copyrightable ruling as well as favorable guidance on what is or is not fair use, now has the lead.

From a practical standpoint, even if it were not fair use, it would be near impossible for the copyright owner to discover.

If the material is a derivative work, and not fair use, a) the original material is under the control of the original copyright holder and b) the audio version of the material is as well.

The court ruled that the stamp was not fair use and the Postal Service had violated the sculptor's copyright.

Short answer: This would almost surely violate copyright law, as this would be a derivative work and is probably not fair use.

Instead, the further you get away from heartland easy fair use cases without actually being in a situation that is obviously not fair use, the more risk you face if push comes to shove and there is litigation.

For the examples you give they are all probably not fair use.

Copying something in its entirety is not Fair Use, either; Fair Use is the use of a small amount of material, not a complete work.

A federal judge in Georgia has ordered Public Resource to remove Georgia's official statutes from its website, finding that the state of Georgia holds a valid copyright in them and that Public Resource's publication was not fair use.

Opinion was Campo Santo is 100 % within legal rights, DMCA applies, LPs (Let's Plays) are not fair use.

Not exact matches

After an hour of research, it was obvious to me that my use of the image would not be categorized as «fair use» due to having a promotional call to action in the blog post.

To be fair, stock - based compensation isn't new — and it's used in many industries like banking, tech, and media — so it's not as if how Tolstedt was paid is out of the ordinary.

Given the company's crunchy Vermont roots, it should not come as much of a surprise that Ben & Jerry's would use Twitter to support a cause promoting sustainability and fair treatment of food producers.

Dorsey, a committed urbanist, owns a BMW, according to Vanity Fair, but he doesn't seem to be using it to commute.

It's a fairly arcane argument over whether Google's design of Android to be compatible with apps written in the Java programming language (now owned by Oracle) was «fair use» or not.

In addition to paying fair prices for the herbs used in its beverages, REBBL donates 2.5 percent of its net revenue to Not For Sale to support regions of the world that are vulnerable to exploitation and human trafficking.

In response, Jolie said Vanity Fair had misrepresented the exercise, which did not use real money and was consensual.

The problem is a board and top executive team that don't always appear to have control of its wide - ranging cast of characters, including founders who have attained near - celebrity status (another co-founder, Biz Stone, is a regular on NPR, and earlier this year Dorsey was profiled in Vanity Fair), headstrong and divisive managers, and investors used to getting their way.

While Facebook's program will apparently use its internal Instant Articles section to entice readers to subscribe, it will reportedly send readers directly to publishers for subscriptions, so Gingras» comments may not be entirely fair.

«Being viewed as not paying a fair share of tax or using questionable tax havens will be unacceptable.»

This is not fair to the working middle class because the Federal Government uses the tax system to encourage a lot of corporate behavior.

As several key copyright cases have shown — including the case of Perfect 10 vs. Google, and a decision involving Google's book - scanning project — just because someone uses content that another entity charges money for doesn't preclude a finding of fair use.

To be fair, the «as long as they're in the store, why don't we...» strategy isn't new in retail, and Loblaws itself has used it to great — if sometimes inexplicable — effect.

This data can be used not just to see if they're being paid a fair wage, but also can be used during the salary negotiation aspect of an interview.

Discrimination is not tolerated on our platform, and we are committed to using our people, platform, and data to raise awareness about fair housing rights and obligations, and to spotlight the challenges that remain.

I was kind of like I said interested in gambling or at least speculating or figuring things out and then taking a calculated gamble and what they were telling me was don't try, there were saying that no one can beat the market and the stock prices are efficient and just through simple observation looking at the newspaper and they used to have the 52 - week high low prices in the newspaper, it seemed unreasonable that you know the fair price was 51 day and eight months later, it was 120, and that was pretty much every stock had that kind of range every year and it didn't make sense to me that the fundamentals of the underlying businesses were actually changing that much.

The new law should not allow Digital Rights Management technologies to prevent fair use of published work.

Of course, it wouldn't be fair to knock Bitcoin's electricity consumption without comparing it to payment systems most people use today.

You can see that the recent price decline did not quite bring Grainger into the fair - value range when using this first method.

I am aware I am using a fair amount of supposition to get to a specific hypothetical, but that is not confirmation bias.

I would never use the term «most Christians», because I know it's not fair.

If there is a God and there is just as much for as against, But lets say there is a God and he made everything Including you and He gets to make the rules because lets face it hes a lot bigger then you, So unfortunately he only wants those who believe in him based on the information given, Lets look at the facts based on the Book,, Some of his own angels turned on him and they see him every day... That had to hurt, So he decides With man he only wants those with the faith to believe based on His book and faith found thru the holy spirit, If you refuse to believe then he cant use you, cant trust you, so he will choose to toss you aside, Hey I understand It ai nt fair, Your important, Your Smart, But unfortunately hes bigger then you and he has the Juice, You either play by the rules or wait and see what not believing leads too.

Ann ensures that each Grace Case offers you not only fair - trade, artisan - crafted heirlooms that changes the worlds for so many of our sisters, but Ann also offers creative ideas and resources of how to use these heirlooms to continue to give grace forward in your own life, to your people, and your community — so you, as a GenEsther, get to be the gift, for such a time as now.

Not by accumulating more money, not by using money for good purposes, not by being just and fair in our dealinNot by accumulating more money, not by using money for good purposes, not by being just and fair in our dealinnot by using money for good purposes, not by being just and fair in our dealinnot by being just and fair in our dealings.

Have never called you names but you still use bad language with me and that is not fair what ever you are Muslim or non Muslim you have no right to accuse people or call them names before you try clarify the issue patiently but you came attacking calling names it is not for what you mentioned but exceeds it further more is it??

It is not the judges right or duty to express his personal opinions or beliefs while sitting on the bench, especially while giving a verdict.Judges are there to make sure due process and a fair and impartial hearing or trial takes place for all those involved.this particular judge's rant on the muslim world based on his views from serving in the military had absolutely no bearing on the case and should not have even been brought up much less used to chastise the victim with.

As long as the message is accurate, it doesn't matter what version you use, but it takes a fair amount of study to understand whether a version is missing it doctrinally.

I don't think it's fair to assume that someone is worshiping a false god just because they use a different word or name.

And since Whitehead also states that «The use of philosophy is to maintain an active novelty of fundamental ideas illuminating the social system» (MT 237), it is obvious that the challenge which Pixley poses is eminently fair and can not be evaded.

And I don't use stereotypes of either the right or the left, so I think it's fair for both sides.

What does it matter when we die what is important is what we do with our life now.The struggles people find themselves is because of living a sinful lifestyle you cant play with fire and not get burnt there are consequences.Jesus wants to bring forgiveness and healing and remove the guilt and shame that you are feeling.Ive have been there i was just as guilty i do nt believe theres a big screen that replays our life if it is it, it will be about what we have done for God as our sins are covered under the blood of Jesus.The judgement for christians is that we must give an account of what we did for Jesus while we were here did we make the most of opportunities given to tell others to reach out others with his love.Mat 25:14 - 30 the Parable of the talents talks about judgement and for me it is all about what we do for Jesus the ones who are faithfull in the small things are set over much.The one who did nt use his talent that God gave him was punished for his lack of faith.So for those who are struggling with sin and life Jesus loves you and has a plan for your life just trust him to help you and he will.To be fair its wont be easy you will have to make some hard choices but he promises to help you through its all about choosing him over choosing what we think best because he knows whats best for us.Its important the choice you make as it will impact your life for eternity.brentnz

Colin... Also note and observe... how your goal in using the scientific terminology was not to proceed with a fair debate, but rather to embarrass your opponent and make him look foolish.

It is not fair to use Muslim soldiers to fight your raciest fights against all that is Islam & Muslim... by such use you are making the Muslim American Soldier appear as a treator to his fellow Muslims in or out of the U.S.

hey... stop using reality to show up the believers... thats not fair... you are only allowed to use 2000 year old do c uments and interpret them in a manner that bolsters your argument.

Highlights for me included: 1) Belcher's call in Chapter 3 to find common ground in classic / orthodox Christianity (the Apostle's Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Athanasian Creed) which, if applied, would dramatically reduce some of the name - calling and accusations of heresy that have been most unhelpful in the discussion between the emerging and traditional camps, 2) Belcher's fabulous treatment of postmodernism and postfoundationalism in Chapter 4, where he rightly explains that when talking about postmodernism, folks in the emerging church and the traditional church are using the same term to refer to two completely different things, and where he concludes that «a third way rejects classical foundationalism and hard postmodernism,» and 3) Belcher's fair handling of the atonement issue in Chapter 6, in which he clarifies that most emergering church leaders «are not against atonement theories and justification, but want to see it balanced with the message of the kingdom of God.»

Richard, yes I think it can be considered «unfair» when using the «rules» to gain an unintended advantage, i.e. intentionally dropping the ball... just because both sides can take advantage of the same loophole does not make the situation fair.

But do you think it should be fair to use profits — from customers who do not share your views — to buy legislation that will harm your customers?

It's not fair that my tax dollars are used to support an organization that won't hire me on the basis of my religion.

Anyone living in relative comfort will see the inequality of life that is just not fair, yet we carry on buying a cup of Starbucks, or using an iphone even though such things done without by many could radically change life for others.