That condition was explicitly stated as part of the TOS of downloading/installing/using the mod to the best of my knowledge, the mod author included this condition as it was something that was stated as a prerequisite by one of the mod authors whose work she used in her mod (her mod used content from several different authors, and any conditions they laid down regarding usage of their mods/content, she had to include in hers)īy downloading/installing/using the mod, MxR was agreeing to be bound by that condition, as well as any others in the TOS for that mod. I think it may have even been included in the fomod. It says nothing about whether a company can or cannot sue for copyright infringement and whether they are right or wrong for doing so.Įdited by Reneer, 16 December 2017 - 12:32 AM.Ī piece of the puzzle that you're missing regarding this particular instance with MxR the mod author specifically stated in their permissions tab/mod description/read-me file that the mod was not, under any circumstances, to be reviewed on Youtube if said review was monetized. He's commercializing his use of the copyrighted work, often using a significant portion of the work (such as displaying an entire armor mod, etc), and his 'unique' style of presenting may in fact have a negative impact upon the potential market for the work, even though the work itself is free.Īll the CRFA does is make sure that companies cannot, in their contracts / terms of service, prohibit, punish or penalize people who review their products / services.

The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.Īs you can see, there are multiple factors where MxR, as an example, would likely not be able to get away with a fair use defense. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole andĤ. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes ģ. There are four factors that need to be looked over by a judge when someone tries to invoke fair use as a defense:ġ. A review IS public scrutiny, how else would you define it? We're not going to agree on this, we should probably move on.Ī review may be public scrutiny, as you say, but using fair use as a defense isn't just whether the infringement fits into a particular category of infringement or not. I'm arguing over what it was designed to protect when it IS used.

Mxr mods fallout 4