After reading the two articles and seeing some of the videos, I have to say that copyright law is overly ambiguous. Does something fall under teh fair use doctrine? How much is too much? When should you ask for permission? Then there’s the fact that if you do ask for permission, many sources and people will simply say, “No,” even if they don’t actually have the right to refuse you. There doesn’t even seem to be consensus among those who make the laws.

Nevertheless, even the majority conceded that the term extension could be seen as “arguably unwise.” A new court could reverse it, and thus the future of the copyright law remains a matter of active contention. Historians therefore need to recognize that there is no fixed body of rules, but rather a shifting terrain of interpretations of the law.

Then there’s the conundrum of the “Fair Use” doctrine. It brings me to the ultimate conclusion that: if you’re going to do research, make sure you at least source everything and give the proper credits to whoever owns or created the material. Be open and transparent about your usage of the material, and if you feel uncomfortable due to the quantity or conditions surrounding the usage of material, just be safe and contact the other. However, do not worry too much because it doesn’t seem as though you’d get a law suit, but rather a “cease and desist” order, in which case you simply remove the material or go through the appropriate channels to use it (pay a fee, for example). In general, you should always assume that something’s copyrighted, unless it was made after 1923 and a few other conditions explained on this sheet.

As for the Amen break video, I find myself agreeing with the premise that “overprotecting copy righted materials is as harmful as underprotecting it.” Ultimately, whether it’s a book, a video, music, or some other form of media, using a small portion of that media for purposes outlined in the Fair Use doctrine, and to create new creative and intellectual material, hardly ever harms the copy right holder. The only reason why companies are so adament about enforcing these copyrights is for money – so that they can receive a portion of the funds made off of their material. Which could make sense. But as the Amen Break shows us, this material can become so distorted or so unrecognizable, or used in such a way that only someone intimately familiar with it could recognize it, that it in no ways harms the holder of the copyright.