copyright question
 

Gosh, its been a while since I've come here. ~Lurker~

Anyway, Toshiba-Emi has been very anal retentive about SR's pictures and the like being used on fansites, causing very good sites to close down because of it...

So I would assume the same would be applied to video clips/sound clips of SR's. But I was wondering if there is some kind of legal limit to show a video clip or sound clip, for example, 5 seconds?

See, I wanted to do some video reviews of Japanese music and I wanted to use some clips to make them less...rant-y. I doubt that I could, lol. Maybe there's some hope?

Oh and, even if it seems like a stupid question, don't bite my head off. XD

SR love forever~ :3

If you'd be able to mimic Ringo's voice exactly and sing the intro to Koko de kissu shite, would that be copyright infringement?

American laws are pretty loose about using material as "commentary." Don't know about Japanese law. The question is, would a law really stop you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

You may still be contacted about copyright infringement (see the Nostalgia Critic's review of Tommy Wiseau's The Room), but you should be fine. I was thinking of putting up a site similar to the Spoony Experiment, but with a focus on music instead of movies/video games. I just don't think I'd have the time.

If Perez Hilton hasn't been sent to prison yet, I doubt you have anything to worry about.

Really though, being a fan of someone is pretty much illegal - it's best to just accept that fact and move on. People freaked out about the Kronekodow fansite guidelines, but they were in fact more personable and sympathetic about it than most. It was just something they were obligated to address, that doesn't necessarily mean they enforce it. It's not cool for young alternative rock musicians to be too preachy about record label rights, I'm sure SR knows that. ;)

Japan especially seems to be fixated on the issue of portrait/publicity rights... See Johnny's entertainment, for example. Even online stores like Yesasia have placeholder images for most (if not all) of TOKIO's albums and singles, because they're scared to put their images anywhere that they don't have absolute dominion over. They're afraid their faces will end up on some product advertisement or something worse.

Even our speculation about Ringo's personal feelings, lyrical interpretation, or anything regarding her motives/beliefs could be considered borderline libel, given what we say about Ringo might be interpreted by corporations as being potentially damaging to her public image/sales.

lol, are you quoting the fansite guidelines?

They'll chase you even in your sleep....well literally lol

btw If I say Ringo's name in a video,would that be copyright infringement?

Actually writing her name in romaji is borderline libelous.

I really wouldn't be worried about Japanese copyright or trademark laws. I found unofficial Pokemon condoms in Kabukicho. If Nintendo hasn't gone after that, I don't see why Toshiba-EMI would go after somebody for a review.

Wow. The only thing that would creep me out more than that would be Teletubbies condoms. The things they sell in this world...scary mood-killers.

I like Maou's rationale and would definitely use it in court.