http://www.noneinc.com/tBSWM/tBSWM_FAQ.html#LibraryOfCongress
Dear Mr. Lopez:
Please accept our apologies for the delay in contacting you about this claim. We are writing now because it is not clear whether you have obtained permission to use the preexisting material contained in your new version of this work. The preexisting material appears to be under copyright protection.
The copyright owner of a work has the exclusive right to make a new version of that work (Section 106 of the copyright law, 17 USC). The law also provides that copyright protection for a work that includes previously copyrighted material does not extend to any part of the work in which this material has been used unlawfully (Section 103). This means that copyright protection will not extend to a derivative work such as a translation, adaptation, or musical arrangement if the preexisting material under copyright protection has been used unlawfully. For more information, please see Circular 22. Please check any written permissions you might have from the copyright owners to determine the extent of your rights with regard to using the copyrighted works. If you have obtained such permissions, please confim this in writing and we will reconsider registration.
If you are not authorized to use the preexisting material or your written permissions indicate that you do not have the right to claim copyright in the new version, we cannot register the claim as submitted. In accordance with our practices, we will close your tile without further action. The fee is not refundable.
If you want to register a claim in your original text (commentary), please send a new printed copy containing only this text. Also, please give us your authorization to amend the "nature of authorship" line to describe the claim as "text" only. We will also delete your statements in the "preexisting material" and "material added to this work" spaces, assuming this text has not been previously published or registered.
Initial Response: Maybe the Library of Congress is trying to make me aware of the potential consequences. But I don't understand why they are worrying about permissions. According to the Library of Congress website: (http://www.loc.gov/about/mission.html)
Quote: "The Library's mission is to support the Congress in fulfilling its constitutional duties and to further the progress of knowledge and creativity for the benefit of the American people."
This work was attempting to push the progress of knowledge and creativity in my own odd way. I hope it is to the benefit of more then just the American people.
Maybe the Library of Congress is attempting to do me a favor. But my stance is what I submitted should be included into the Library. If it is or is not lawful, I don't get to choose. There are exceptions to the exclusive rights of copyright law so that authors can create creative works with limited use of copyrighted materials without acquiring permission from the rights holder; commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, scholarship are a few. The laws and how they are weighed on the scale of justice make the final decision. 'Thee Backslacpkping With Media' is a creative work and to have a robust Library, the inclusion of 'Thee Backslacpkping With Media' should happen. If at any time someone wants to take issue with the reuse which occurs in 'Thee Backslacpkping With Media', then we'll deal with that as it comes. So far, I can barely get people to watch the work. Having the Library of Congress make a permission pre-judgement, I don't think sends the right message to creators.
Sincerely,
%20