Arnie Lutzker has taught many times for the Center for Intellectual Property. In the past, he presented at various CIP seminars and conferences. And he contributed a chapter to the CIP Handbook. Arnie is a great copyright teacher and the CIP staff welcomes his wisdom and insight.
Recently, Arnie wrote an article on the dispute between the Association for Information Media and Equipment (AIME) and UCLA. To be fair, Arnie is representing AIME and so this article should be read with an understanding that he is advocating on their behalf. Nevertheless, I think his analysis and observations should substantively contribute to the ongoing discussion of this very important subject of streaming video to classes.
Kimberly M. Bonner, J.D.
Executive Director, CIP
The much publicized educational video streaming dispute between AIME (Association for Information Media and Equipment, www.aime.org) and UCLA poses a number of complicated copyright questions. The following article, which I prepared recently as counsel for AIME, puts the dispute in context and addresses Fair Use, as well as the TEACH Act and face-to-face teaching exemptions in Section 110 of the Copyright Act. The thrust of the article is to underscore that the copyright law does not countenance a one-size fits all solution to video streaming. For educators who want to rely upon the legal exceptions rather than author permissions, they must be prepared to do serious homework on a work-by-work basis, and realize that use of many videos created by educational publishers, like AIME members, are not available for unlicensed streaming. Streaming without careful consideration of the nature of the work in question risks the real prospect that the use is outside the scope of the limitations and thus a copyright violation. I hope this piece will lead not only to a balanced and enlightened discussion of video streaming practices, but also to implementation of responsible digital practices.
Arnold Lutzker, J.D.
Lutzker & Lutzker, Washington, DC