But drastically changing the medium or the purpose is one way that works are considered transformative under fair use.
On the other hand, creating and selling an audiobook of a given written book is now an accepted thing in publishing, so those rights are definitely written into contracts. Whether they are sufficiently transformative in a noncommercial setting has never been litigated, as far as I know.
But making a play of a nonfiction book -- a different medium -- survived a copyright challenge, I THINK. I could be very wrong about this.
You're right about the legalese, though. It's hairsplitting that would make a theologian cry. And I'm admittedly way out of my depth here without doing some research.
no subject
But drastically changing the medium or the purpose is one way that works are considered transformative under fair use.
On the other hand, creating and selling an audiobook of a given written book is now an accepted thing in publishing, so those rights are definitely written into contracts. Whether they are sufficiently transformative in a noncommercial setting has never been litigated, as far as I know.
But making a play of a nonfiction book -- a different medium -- survived a copyright challenge, I THINK. I could be very wrong about this.
You're right about the legalese, though. It's hairsplitting that would make a theologian cry. And I'm admittedly way out of my depth here without doing some research.