On March 27, 2000 federal Judge Harry L. Hupp for the Central District of California issued a first ruling in favor of Tickets.com in the case of Ticketmaster Corp. v. Tickets.com (99-7654) involving alleged copyright infringement for hypertext linking. Tickets.com is an online provider of entertainment, sports and travel tickets and provides hypertext links to Ticketmaster web pages for tickets not available at Tickets.com. Ticketmaster sued Tickets.com claiming such links constituted copyright infringement, among other claims.
In his ruling, Hupp concluded “hypertext linking does not itself involve a violation of the Copyright Act.since no copying is involved.” The basis for this conclusion can be seen from the statutory language of the Copyright Act, Title 17 section 106 of the United States Code, describing the exclusive rights of copyright holders, which reads as follows:
“Subject to sections 107 through 120, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:
1. to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;
2. to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;
3. to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;
4. in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, to perform the copyrighted work publicly;
5. in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyrighted work publicly; and
6. in the case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission. ”
17 U.S.C. sec. 106.
June 2, 2007 | ISSUE 43•22
” The thing that most fascinated me was the part about slash fanfic writers learning techniques for holding on to good fictional values while they’re writing about massively distracting subjects, a.k.a. the Id Vortex.”
This page provides a brief definition of queer theory, and several links to related websites.
. . .
Queer theory is a set of ideas based around the idea that identities are not fixed and do not determine who we are. It suggests that it is meaningless to talk in general about ‘women’ or any other group, as identities consist of so many elements that to assume that people can be seen collectively on the basis of one shared characteristic is wrong. Indeed, it proposes that we deliberately challenge all notions of fixed identity, in varied and non-predictable ways.
Queer theory is based, in part, on the work of Judith Butler (in particular her book Gender Trouble, 1990).
It is a mistake to think that queer theory is another name for lesbian and gay studies. They’re different. Queer theory has something to say to lesbian and gay studies — and also to a bunch of other areas of sociology and cultural theory.