General

King — an actor, speaker and producer — was the founder and head of Higher Ground Productions, billed as a “gateway for inner peace, unity and global transformation.” On her company’s Web site, King described her mission as encouraging personal growth and positive social change.

King also was an author and held memberships in the Southern Christian Leadership Conference — which her father co-founded in 1957 — and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. Her death comes more than a year after the death of her mother, Coretta Scott King.

She was the most visible and outspoken among the Kings’ four children during this year’s Martin Luther King Day in January, the first since her mother’s death. At her father’s former Atlanta church, Ebenezer Baptist, she performed a series of solo skits that told stories including a girl’s first ride on a desegregated bus and a college student’s recollection of the 1963 desegregation of Birmingham, Ala.

She also urged the audience to be a force for peace and love, and to use the King holiday each year to ask tough questions about their own beliefs on prejudice.

source

wiki bio

Born in Montgomery, Alabama, King was a human rights worker and actress. She was a member of the Board of Directors of the Martin Luther King Jr. Center for Nonviolent Social Change, Inc. (the official national memorial to her father) and was founding Director of the King Center’s Cultural Affairs Program. She served on the Partnership Council of Habitat for Humanity, was a member of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, a sponsor of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom and held a lifetime membership in the NAACP. King received a B.A. degree with honors from Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts, a Masters degree in Theatre from New York University and an Honorary Doctorate of Humane Letters from Marywood University. In 1978 she starred as Rosa Parks in the TV miniseries King (which was based on her father’s life and released on DVD in 2005).

On her blog Big Blue Wave Suzanne accuses me of copyright infringement in using a still from the March for Life Youtube video.

I would like to direct her attention to the following most particularly items 1(wherein the still was used as part of a reporting process, 3, (wherein the still was a trivial amount of the video) and 6 (wherein there is little likelihood that my use of the still is going to affect the marketing of the video);

It then establishes six principal criteria for evaluating fair dealing.

1. The Purpose of the Dealing Is it for research, private study, criticism, review or news reporting? It expresses that “these allowable purposes should not be given a restrictive interpretation or this could result in the undue restriction of users’ rights.”
2. The Character of the Dealing How were the works dealt with? Was there a single copy or were multiple copies made? Were these copies distributed widely or to a limited group of people? Was the copy destroyed after its purpose was accomplished? What are the normal practices of the industry?
3. The Amount of the Dealing How much of the work was used? What was the importance of the infringed work? Quoting trivial amounts may alone sufficiently establish fair dealing. In some cases even quoting the entire work may be fair dealing.
4. Alternatives to the Dealing Was a “non-copyrighted equivalent of the work” available to the user? Could the work have been properly criticized without being copied?
5. The Nature of the Work Copying from a work that has never been published could be more fair than from a published work “in that its reproduction with acknowledgement could lead to a wider public dissemination of the work – one of the goals of copyright law. If, however, the work in question was confidential, this may tip the scales towards finding that the dealing was unfair.”
6. Effect of the Dealing on the Work Is it likely to affect the market of the original work? “Although the effect of the dealing on the market of the copyright owner is an important factor, it is neither the only factor nor the most important factor that a court must consider in deciding if the dealing is fair.” A statement that a dealing infringes may not be sufficient, but evidence will often be required.

“These factors may be more or less relevant to assessing the fairness of a dealing depending on the factual context of the allegedly infringing dealing. In some contexts, there may be factors other than those listed here that may help a court decide whether the dealing was fair.”
source