No Stupid Questions
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
view the rest of the comments
People can give you their best guesses, but without a court case and a ruling it is impossible to say what the answer will be with iron certainty.
My guess, for US law, would be based of the four factor balancing test used in determining fair use. The four factors are the nature of the use, the nature of the copyrighted material, the amount of the copyrighted material used, and the effect of the use on the value of the material.
If you are using the copyrighted works for a non-profit purpose that helps, if you are remixing them that helps, if you are using works that are not violating right of first publishing that helps.
Importantly copyright does not have to be enforced by the holder for them to retain full legal protection. What that means is even if the holder somehow became aware (which honestly is pretty doubtful for such a small individual use), they can simply choose not to pursue the matter. The resources that could go into pursuing a copyright case for such a use are probably going to be a lot more than any gain they'd get. Big IP holders have endless waves of people using their material, and their resources are better spent going after uses that are clearly trying to make or making a profit or distributing their copyrighted works.
The TLDR is yeah sure, it's probably fine. If you somehow got the evil eye on you, in practical reality the first thing you'd get would be a C&D letter anyway.
Edit: Here is the relevant text in 17 U.S. Code § 107
That’s just it. This idea involves dancing very close to the fire, so anything could happen. The result may even depend on the other legal cases available in the area.
Fair use doesn't even enter the picture unless it's a copyright violation.
When you use someone else's copyright work in a way that they could take you to court to stop you, you can in some situations argue that the way you infringed on their copyright should be allowed: that is, that your use of the thing was fair.
OP's question smells like a software development question. Which would be well served by a straightforward answer of "if the parts you cut out are still protected by copyright, then your assembly and trace would be a derivative work".
That would be an argument made in court, pursuant to the balancing test. You would be arguing that the use wasn't actually infringement. Thats how fair use is determined.
That's like asserting that a self-defense claim is an argument that you didn't hit the other guy. You really did hit him (copyright infringement / assault), but you have a defense that admits the literal facts but absolves you of liability (fair use / self-defense.)
You don't need to argue self-defense if you can convince the court that you didn't actually hit the other guy.
The OP is asking about using portions of copy written works. Therefore if those works were used or not wouldn't be at issue. What would be issue is if the use is fair use. Which again, goes back to the balancing test which would be decided in court if the rights holder pursues it.