A question of derivative works

[cwmonkey]

I have been (heavily) editing small portions of tv shows to make animated gifs known as "cinemagraphs".

Here is an example: http://i.imgur.com/6qmkL.gif

I was wondering if this and other works like it would be considered derivative works and if I would be within my rights to request to be credited when they are used on other sites.

Thanks.

[FlyingRon]

They certainly would be derivative works, but you seem to be confused.
But worrying about being credited is a bit odd when you're ripping off other people's copyright.

[cwmonkey]

ripping off other people's copyright.

Seems like a trollish thing to say considering the definition of derivative work says you are using copyrighted work and essentially making it your own.

Regardless, I credit the original shows on every page of my site.

[FlyingRon]

Seems like a trollish thing to say considering the definition of derivative work says you are using copyrighted work and essentially making it your own.

Regardless, I credit the original shows on every page of my site.

It's not a trollish thing to say and you've got a warped idea of what a derivative work is. Making the derivative work infringes on the original if you do not have permission. Just because you made a derivative work doesn't suddenly make the thing 100% yours. It makes only your changes yours. The original author still has full rights to what you took from him, making the derivative work shared between the two parties.

"Crediting" means squat. That is for academic and journalistic integrity which has NOTHING to do with copyright. It is no less of an infringement if you thumb your nose at the original author by stating where you stole the work from.

[cwmonkey]

Meh, I'd ask for your opinion on fair use but you're pretty much just kind of a dick for no real reason.

I'll make sure to never use this site again.

[tranquility]

I'm sorry you feel his accurate statement was without....something, but, have you actually looked at the law?

The only possible answer without a specific case with your facts is: Yes, it's a violation.

Look at the laws and see how they're written and how courts have interpreted them. "Fair use", sure. Well, after a lawsuit costing you thousands if the holder of the copyright wanted to prosecute it AND you were right. (I don't think your instance would be covered under fair use anyway. What would your claim be under?)

We lost a valued member to the forum when I pointed out the fact we are almost assuredly all copyright violators when we surf the internet. The laws are written extremely broadly and all we have is the good faith of the holder(s) to not sue for silly things. They're starting to sue for silly things. What result?