I've forgotton to say to a
I've forgotton to say to anyone using this web site, "Please feel free to download and save my 550 videos (of my car in Wyoming). I consider them in the public domain and will be happy that you use them any way you want."
Now, I'd like to express my sincere thanks to David Jones for his lengthly email to me on fair use. Mr Jones knows his copyright law and he cited a number of court cases that illustrate good examples of fair use (and also the abuse of it). Bottom line, no SONY attorney worth his "salt" is going waste SONY's money suing anyone over (my) minimal use of the Bad Boys II clips in my recent postings. Instead, if anyone at SONY even cared at all, the SONY lawyers might simply ask that the clips be removed. They would know that this web site is non-profit and educational in nature (yes even if the site IS for "over zealous" Ferrari car nuts, it still qualifies as an educational web site; And a forum for discussion of a special area of interest, Ferraris). Thus, SONY lawyers might simply ask that the clips be removed from the site. And they'd do that just to be seen (in the eyes of their corporate bosses) as somehow being "proactive"-- even though they'd know the postings were fair use. As Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor told us in Laramie recently, contemporary American lawyers are only out for their client's "interests"-- often in lieu of the law or common sense. And because of this, she also said that it's no wonder that so many of them are unhappy people and wouldn't chose a career in law if they had the decision to make again.
Although I know he didn't intend to, in his email's opening sentence to me, Mr Jones spelled out exactly why, what I posted from Bad Boys 2 DOES qualify as legitimate fair use. He says,
"In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and "transformative" purpose such as to comment upon, criticize or parody a copyrighted work. Such uses can be done without permission from the copyright owner."
In my post, I edited the video to short clips of the 575, thus transforming it in the process to concisely and strictly illustrate my comments and criticisms of THE FILM's portrayal of the 575's real capabilities. I was criticizing the film for making the 575 look like a teen boy's wet dream fantasy, racing around sidewalks, smoking tires, etc.
Mr Jones is right about this being a Ferrari forum. This is not a film school web site where films are critiqued. Yet, as part of my commentary on the portrayal of the 575 in the film, I specifically did point out the film's apparent special effects techniques (ie blue screen to enable actor Will Smith to shoot an automatic rifle out the window, while spinning the 575 360 degrees). And I used the "transformative" tools (editing of the short clips from the film) which Mr Jones indicates are needed to qualify for fair use. I specifically chose only those clips that I thought illustrated the 575 in action. For example, I didn't post minutes and minutes of either of the film's two car chases...showing all the action and the other types of cars. Had I had done that, it would've eaten at the heart of the film's commercial appeal because this web sit'e Ferrari enthusiasts would not have an incentive to go consume the whole film. Had I done that (posted the whole car chases,etc) it would have diminished the film's commercial potential. Instead, I edited extremely short shots of the 575--alone-- in action. And this transformative process was INTENDED to comment ONLY on the portrayal of the 575's capabilities in the film. That LIMITED commentary function, as Mr Jones points out, is central to the proper use of Section 107 and Fair Use. And my commentary should cause Ferrari enthusiasts to go see the entire film for themselves!
Any SONY lawyer with any brains is going to know that the net comercial result of my posting of the short clips of the 575 on this site will only stimulate the readers of this site to go buy or rent the film and see the whole thing, thus profiting Sony.
In light of that, I don't appreciate Mr Jone's assertion that I "tried" to do anything improper and that my ass is going to be "salted" as a result. In my life, all over the world, nobody has "salted" my ass-- ever (and some have tried, believe me). Mr Jones is obviously a lawyer himself and I'm afraid, due to his occupation, he is himself part of the modern legal culture of (as Sandra Day OConnor told us in Laramie) "Winner takes All".
==========================================
Moving on, a number of other TV shows and theatrical films have portrayed Ferrari automobiles in the past:
TV Shows:
CHiPs and Columbo both used various models in various episodes. ChiPs actor Larry Wilcox was raised in Rawlins, Wyoming. He told me once that he remembered Rawlins as a "whorehouse, out in the middle of nowhere". Right, but there's a stretch of open road north of Rawlins, leading to Jeffrey City, made for a Ferrari at full throttle! I'll be on it in October, heading to Yellowstone.
Other Ferrari appearances on TV:
246: Hart to Hart (I used to rent Stefanie's Malibu "Little reward" on Winding Way. She drove an SUV,a Land Rover I think)
308: Magnum, P.I
365 GTS replica and Testarosa: Miami Vice
And in Theatrical films:
246: The Cannonball Run
250: Johnny Dark, Never Steal Anything Small, Viva Las Vegas, Vanilla Sky(fake)Ferris Bueller's Day Off (fake),
275: Thomas Crown Affair, A New Leaf,
308: The Cannonball Run, National Lampoon's Vacation, Against All Odds.
328: Beverly Hills Cop II, The Hidden, L.A. Story, 355: The Rock
365: Gone in 60 Seconds, A Star is Born, The Gumball Rally
400i: Rain Man
575M: Bad Boys II
Mondial: Scent of a Woman
Enzo: Charlie's Angels Full Throttle
This media exposure has contributed to Ferrai sales in the U.S. In 1993, 507 Ferraris were sold in the U.S. And in 2003, 1,261 new units were purchased, according to Motor Trend magazine.
Wheeeeeee 
