Is it copyright infringement? — Page 2

Doesn't the Speech and Debate Clause just keep lawmakers from being punished (by the executive branch) for speeches and votes? It doesn't absolve them of obeying the law.

That being said, it'd be silly for anyone to sue, I think.

This would not be copyright infringement.

In addition to demonstrating willfulness, the government must prove that the defendant engaged in an act of infringement "for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain." 17 U.S.C. § 506(a).

Neither readings in public libraries nor readings during political speeches like Cruz's would qualify as having a purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain. This is true notwithstanding any possible argument, no matter how persuasive, as to Cruz's deeper motives being self-aggrandizing; that factor would have no import given the ostensible purpose of speeches for advocacy purposes, especially those in a public forum without charge.

The same standards would apply in a suit brought by the government or the estate of Dr. Seuss. Not to mention that in this case the estate has probably not suffered any damages from the reading; arguably quite the contrary given all the talk about Green Eggs and Ham.

Updated On: 9/26/13 at 10:20 AM

As I said before, a lawsuit would be silly. But I'm curious as to the difference between a book (even a children's book) and a play. The published editions always contain language forbidding public performance, including "recitation, lecturing, public reading, radio broadcasting, television . . ."

It would seem to me that the copyright law would be the same, regardless of the category of the work.

I'm going to have to eat crow here (just as I did when Reginald hit me with gospel.... literally).

Apparently, although damages may be small, free performance can result in copyright infringement, though not for infringement for profit which is another cause of action. This would seem to apply to any kind of copyrighted material, play or non.

But I would still guess that in the instance of Cruz reading Green Eggs and Ham on the Senate floor, it would not be actionable. I'm not really sure.

"10 BIG COPYRIGHT MYTHS EXPLAINED
http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

Attorney Brad Templeton selects ten "myths" and debunks them. For example, his second myth is often heard by those presenting plays in, say, a Lab Theatre environment: "If I don't charge for it, it's not a violation." Templeton makes the record clear:

False. Whether you charge can affect the damages awarded in court, but that's essentially the only difference. It's still a violation if you give it away -- and there can still be heavy damages if you hurt the commercial value of the property."