• @jordanlund
    link
    -12 days ago

    No, it isn’t.

    https://copyright.psu.edu/copyright-basics/fair-use/

    "In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—

    the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

    the nature of the copyrighted work;

    the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

    the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."

    So, me, making a fan page for FunkoPop versions of the Five Nights at Freddies characters and using their images? THAT’S fair use.

    Me charging money for a fan game based on the same Funko versions of those characters is NOT fair use.

    “Section 107 of the Copyright Act gives examples of purposes that are favored by fair use: “criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, [and] research.””

      • @jordanlund
        link
        -22 days ago

        Fortunately our laws aren’t about what’s moral or not. You need religious police for that.

        The correct process would have been to issue a takedown request, then go after the domain if nothing was done, they just jumped the gun.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          3
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          what i mean by moral, is about things being fair or not, and this is clearly not.

          see, the fact that they can jump the gun, but the end users cant is the problem here. even the correct process is very biased towards big companies because they can afford a lawyer army to harass people with weaponized bureaucracy.

          who cares besides them anyway? they cant sue everyone.