geni wrote:
So we cannot
address the question of whether trailers are the same or a
different product, since this is not addressed directly in statute law, but only
addressed or partially addressed in case law.
In that case, I would lean toward adding no additional interpretations on
our part, and letting the case law determine the situation
There is no additional
interpretation. As statute law is written
screen shots of trailers published before their respective films
without copyright notices are PD. There are some possible exceptions
but given what we use them for we are unlikely to trigger them (say a
copyrighted painting appeared in the trailer).
Except for time-expired copyrights, I doubt that the trailers are PD,
but they clearly come under fair use. If one considers that they were
published in the first place for free distribution, showing them does
not diminish the producer's revenue within the meaning of the fourth
factor of fair use. Their purpose was a marketting one to encourage the
public to see the whole film.
Ec