Copyright Law
I relearned in class that plagiarism (stealing or taking material that someone else created and using it as one’s own) is bad and not to go there. Plagiarism is a tough topic today because of the amount of material that is available in digital form and the ease with which one can copy and paste and slightly change material.
Copyright law says that we must give credit when quoting or using expressions from a copyrighted source – assume all hardcopy and websites are copyrighted. A copyright establishes ownership and control of material.
Permissions and ownership can be difficult topics sometimes in maintaining websites. I maintain a website with historical pictures on it. I have had instances where people have given me old pictures, postcards or newspaper clippings for which I do not know the author or owner, and gaining permission is not possible. I wind up making a judgment call as to whether to use them or how to phrase some kind of credit. A question I have is how copyrights work for material that is constantly changing, like a website.
The videos in class were good, but the examples used, like the Harry Potter case, are hard to relate to. I would have appreciated examples closer to the classroom situation.
Copyright law says that we must give credit when quoting or using expressions from a copyrighted source – assume all hardcopy and websites are copyrighted. A copyright establishes ownership and control of material.
Permissions and ownership can be difficult topics sometimes in maintaining websites. I maintain a website with historical pictures on it. I have had instances where people have given me old pictures, postcards or newspaper clippings for which I do not know the author or owner, and gaining permission is not possible. I wind up making a judgment call as to whether to use them or how to phrase some kind of credit. A question I have is how copyrights work for material that is constantly changing, like a website.
The videos in class were good, but the examples used, like the Harry Potter case, are hard to relate to. I would have appreciated examples closer to the classroom situation.
More on Copyright Law
I think that the AP was in the right in this case and the settlement was fair as far as we know – we do not know the financial settlement details. AP is in the business of news and photos and depends on the revenue generated by those products and services. Fairey could have taken his own photo of Obama or used one of those available free from the white house, but selected the AP photo because of its unique appeal. Because of that and the fact that Google Images clearly identifies the source of the photo, he should have negotiated with AP before the fact, and he can’t complain when the AP demanded much more after he has made the photo famous. Fairey could have modified Obama’s expression which would have given him a better fair use case, but he did not. The fact that he sold merchandise based on the photo also counters a fair use argument. If AP had used Creative Commons, they still would have required compensation and permission and Fairey would have still ignored the conditions, so I don’t think Creative Commons would have changed anything in this case.
Below is my Obama-ized picture using http://lunapic.com/editor/?action=go-obama . How easily photos are altered using digital tools!
I think that the AP was in the right in this case and the settlement was fair as far as we know – we do not know the financial settlement details. AP is in the business of news and photos and depends on the revenue generated by those products and services. Fairey could have taken his own photo of Obama or used one of those available free from the white house, but selected the AP photo because of its unique appeal. Because of that and the fact that Google Images clearly identifies the source of the photo, he should have negotiated with AP before the fact, and he can’t complain when the AP demanded much more after he has made the photo famous. Fairey could have modified Obama’s expression which would have given him a better fair use case, but he did not. The fact that he sold merchandise based on the photo also counters a fair use argument. If AP had used Creative Commons, they still would have required compensation and permission and Fairey would have still ignored the conditions, so I don’t think Creative Commons would have changed anything in this case.
Below is my Obama-ized picture using http://lunapic.com/editor/?action=go-obama . How easily photos are altered using digital tools!