This study conducted by Pat Aufderheide and Peter Jaszi of American University's Center for Social Media describes the adverse effects of more stringent copyright and licensing laws on documentary filmmakers. Aufderheide and Jaszi interviewed 45 professional documentary filmmakers in their study. As a result of these interviews, the team found a series of common problems in the rights clearance process: escalating costs, an arduous process and self-censorship as a result. While these filmmakers are seen as hurt by copyright laws, they also understand that they would like their own work to be copyrighted, and in the end do not want to do away with rights clearances, but want to make the process more rational. The report also details the next steps that should be taken to facilitate the clearance process and build greater awareness of filmmakers' use rights.

Kembrew MacLeod takes a decidedly anti-corporate stance in Freedom of Expression, as he details the effects conglomeratization and more stringent laws have had on creative industries such as music, film and other art forms. MacLeod believes that these laws cause the creators of culture to self-censor in order to prevent legal action, and that as more laws are created (such as the DMCA) more self-censorship will occur. According to MacLeod, this increasingly hostile environment then pits "Intellectual Property" against "Freedom of Expression." MacLeod feels that both IP and free expression can co-exist, but not in the current legal climate.

This article from the Southern California Law Review highlights the importance of the preservation of fair use rights in the educational realm. Silverberg describes the changes to the fair use landscape in the past few decades, and then highlights how these changes specifically affect academia. Current “safe harbors” for academic fair use are critiqued as being overly restrictive, and the author urges the court to take a less restrictive view on fair use claims, in order to increase academic discourse.

In this article, Carol Bartow examines the difference between copyright infringement and the protections afforded parodies and works that use other works as “inspiration.” Central to this argument is Alice Randall’s The Wind Done Gone; a derivative work of Margaret Mitchell’s novel Gone with the Wind, told from the perspective of Scarlett's multiracial half-sister. Bartow takes issue with the doctrine of “Substantial Similarity” and feels it has sometimes been used too strictly to penalize those who draw creative inspirations from other works. According to Bartow, the solution to navigating the murky territory of derivative works is a more consistent judicial treatment of copyright infringement claims.

In this article for Wired Magazine, Larry Lessig offers an overview of some of the troubles causes by over-protective copyright laws. As an example, Lessig tries to license the song "Happy Birthday" for recording and distribution, in honor of the first “birthday” of the Free Culture Movement. In order to obtain the rights to the song, Lessig must navigate through a web of nonresposive organizations and exorbitant fees. In the end, Lessig does not obtain the ability to record the song at all, revealing the weakness and confusion that are present in the current copyright system.

This article maps the history of copyright over the past 250 years, and the changes that this legal field is currently undergoing. The article argues that until the advent of the internet, copyright increasingly supported centralized commercial control. However, the rise of the internet has challenged the feasibility of this centralized control. The authors argue that copyright's basic function must be changed in order to deal with the current reality of decentralized content and an ever-expanding marketplace of ideas.

This article argues that the authenticity of real-life images (instead of reenactments) in documentaries is essential, and powerful restrictions on fair use are increasingly erasing the real images from our film culture. Images and video clips, the backbone of documentaries, are increasingly in the hands of high-priced corporate archives. This fact, coupled with the fact that rights are often cleared for only very short periods (thanks to the advent of DVD technology) is severely limiting the leeway filmmakers have in producing genuine cultural products.

In this article from the Journal of Intellectual Property Law Lydia Loren denounces the second-class status that fair use has been given in the realm of copyright law. Loren is frustrated by the court’s routine emphasis on monetary and market-driven issues, often the deciding factors in fair use cases. Loren feels these rulign shortchange the purpose of fair use claims by not considering the external benefits that fair use would provide in some cases. According to Loren, the chief deciding factor in ruling on fair use claims should be to see if these claims further knowledge and learning.

This site, run by Stanford University, is a clearinghouse for up-to-date information on copyright issues and legislation. Connected with Stanford Law School and Professor Larry Lessig, this site provides links to articles and guides detailing current copyright and fair use issues. Articles from experts commenting on recent court cases is also available. Here, visitors can also download a full version of Lessig’s latest book, Free Culture.

This article, from The Washington Post, highlights the specific copyright troubles beleaguering Eyes on the Prize. Eyes on the Prize, a documentary about the American Civil Rights movement originally aired on PBS in the 1980's in a serialized format. Since then, however, this film series has become a central part of the debate over fair use and copyright law. Many of the film's clearances for material have expired and the cost of renewing the rights would be several hundred thousand dollars. Consequently, the films cannot presently be publicly shown or distributed legally.