There are definitely abuses that would not fall under a de minimus exception, however these in general are deliberate attempts to circumvent copyright by showing image that you would otherwise not be allowed to by manipulating its context.
I've been part of the production of several feature films at Pixar, and also wrote software for Disney's Cineon system which was used to remove elements of the image in a live-action film, to restore an old film, or to remove the cable from the image when an actor flies or falls on screen. We had a number of reasons to change a film image when translating it to other languages, for markets including Germany. Copyright law was never one of them, though trademark law certainly was. Pixar and Disney would not have used a copyrighted or trademarked element as a major element of the film without permission, and we did get photo releases from anyone in a speaking role. Mattel, to their enduring chagrin, refused us permission to use Barbie as a character in the original Toy Story. But as incidental elements? No problem. So, your page of code is going to be treated the same way as a news paper or a magazine cover on the streets of New York in some movie background. It's just there for versimilitude, and does not create a derivative work. Thanks Bruce Hendrik Weimer <[email protected]> wrote: >Bruce Perens <[email protected]> writes: > >> Yes, but most nations that don't have fair use doctrine recognize a >de >> minimus exception in art. > >At least in Germany this exception is limited to unintentional >inclusion. For instance, distributing a photograph of a showroom >containing a copyrighted painting constitutes infringement. > >Hendrik -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
