Certainly the copyright owners should be compensated, but how is ANYONE served by booting to the curb a 16-hour Elvis Presley bio video?

A U.S. appeals court brought down the curtain Thursday on a film documentary about singer Elvis Presley, saying it made improper use of copyrighted film, photo and musical material.

....The case centered on a video called "The Definitive Elvis" a 16-hour documentary that retailed for $99 after costing Passport Video more than $2 million to make.


Elvis Presley Enterprises, entities that owned the rights to various Presley television appearances and Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller, who wrote the hits "Jailhouse Rock" and "Hound Dog," objected to the documentary's use of their material.

The 9th circuit upheld a lower court decision blocking the further distribution of the video.

"It would be impossible to produce a biography of Elvis without showing some of his most famous television appearances for reference purposes," the court wrote.

"But some of the clips are played without much interruption, if any. The purpose of showing these clips likely goes beyond merely making a reference for a biography, but instead serves the same intrinsic entertainment value that is protected by Plaintiff's copyrights." [Reuters]

What is copyright for again?