search

Chocobozzz / PeerTube

ActivityPub-federated video streaming platform using P2P directly in your web browser
https://joinpeertube.org/
GNU Affero General Public License v3.0
13.13k stars 1.52k forks source link

Fair Use/ Fair Dealing label in the license options #6561

Open strypey opened 2 months ago

strypey commented 2 months ago

Describe the problem to be solved

I have downloaded a a number of public interest videos from YouTub and published them on a PeerTube server. Because I think the topics they cover are of socio-politically important, and I want people to be able to see them without being exposed to manipulative recommendation algorithms and proprietary JavaScript. Here's an example; https://peertube.nz/w/4kJGGBd7Dm2WpwVS2FDWC8

Because my intention is for people to watch these videos for the purposes of 'Research and Private Study', I believe I have a legal right to do this under the "Fair Dealing" exemption in NZ copyright law. Roughly equivalent to "Fair Use" in US copyright law. This is explained in the video description, but the license field in the published video says "unknown", which isn't strictly accurate.

Describe the solution you would like

I would like to be able to choose something like "Fair Dealing"/ "Fair Use" as the license option when I publish a video.

Bonus points for localisation, so that I see "Fair Dealing", while someone publishing a video with a US localisation will see "Fair Use".

letydoesstuff commented 2 months ago

I get the intent here but fair use/fair dealing are legal arguments and not licenses. If I, for example, film myself giving commentary over short clips of a movie, that clip is arguably copyrighted to me. The owner of the movie might argue that the copyright actually belongs to them, but I would argue back that my use of their source material is transformative and therefor allowed under fair use.

The license of my resulting video isn't "Fair Use"/"Fair Dealing". The license is whatever I want to set it to as the creator of the work, and specifically not either of those terms because they are not licenses. It'd feel weird to have non-licenses under the license category.

strypey commented 2 months ago

Fair points @letydoesstuff.

It'd feel weird to have non-licenses under the license category.

This could be fixed by changing the name of the category, eg to something like "Copying". But I get that this is a much more disruptive change to the HX (Human eXperience) than my original suggestion, so not ideal. But having the license field say "unknown", when that isn't strictly true, isn't ideal either.

Do you have any other suggestions for people in situations like the one I described? Where the video is under ARR copyright, but being published under an assumed Fair Use/ Fair Dealing exemption. What about an option that says "All Rights Reserved (Fair Use)", and/ or "All Rights Reserved (Fair Dealing)"?