In the comment section of this blog, write 2 important things that you learned from this reading. Please be sure to identify yourself.
Melissa Cast-Brede, from the UNO library will be the guest presenter in our class on Monday. She will address copyright, on-line library resources, and information literacy.
1. You can take a large portion of a work if you have changed the meaning when you are creating a parody.
ReplyDelete2. It's pretty unpredictable whether your use of someone's work will qualify as fair or not.
1. You need to think about fair use and copyright with any form of data you may want to use, including photographs.
ReplyDelete2. The size of the sample, purpose of use, and possibility of infringing on owner's ability to profit are major factors in determining fair use.
I think this blog by composer Jason Robert Brown is relevant to this issue, especially with our challenge of observing copyright law as consumers and teaching our students. It details a series of emails he exchanged with a teenager regarding fair use and his sheet music.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.jasonrobertbrown.com/weblog/2010/06/fighting_with_teenagers_a_copy.php
(Sorry, I haven't learned how to copy and paste an active link.)
1. Even when you acknowledge the source material and it is a consideration in a fair use determination it will not protect a claim of infringement.
ReplyDelete2. I learned how merky the whole copyright use really is and when using someone elses work publicly, you better get a lawyer to review the work before making it public.
Bob S.
Diane Allen said...
ReplyDelete1. Less is more, be careful what you say, and even then there are chances that you might get into problems with copyright infringement troubles.
2. Judges can interpret copyright infringement as they see fight. The copyright laws have many gray areas open to interpretation so be very careful. Ask yourself why, to what purpose and does it affect the author in any way.
1. Even if you are sure that your use of a copyrighted text is fair use, consider consulting a lawyer before using it because if you are sued, the cost of defending yourself could outweigh any other benefits from using the piece, even if the results are in your favor.
ReplyDelete2. The fair use rules seem to be fairly subjective, and two cases that are very similar to each other could have two very different outcomes because of one small difference.
1. I guess I have never really pondered the whole parody issue in terms of the copyright concept. It seems to me that if the parody particular to a publisher does not negatively effect the publication's status or the money it brings in, then the parody's author has little to worry about regarding copyright legality or court room appearances. How interesting that one person's slanted perspective on another's time and effort is permitted as long as money is made in the process.
ReplyDelete2. I agree with my colleagues that one should seriously consider consulting a lawyer to review their pre-publication product before taking any further action. Everything from what text, how much text and why you took the text to the judge's demeanor and personal morals have tremendous relevance on whether your publication will escape the death sentence. How frustrating to go to all of the time and effort to develop a publication only to have it "revoked" in a court battle and you leave with a legal fees bill in hand.
1. I found it to be very interesting on how there isn't a concrete definition of fair use, and how they compared it to being that way because the judges and lawmakers that created the fair use law wanted it to reflect our freedom of speech law.
ReplyDelete2. I never really thought of photographs being considered for fair use so the example lawsuit agains the producer of the movie Seven was the first time that I have ever heard of that.
Overall, I can say that learned a lot about fair use and the vagueness of of the law that protects it. So I am looking forward to learning more tomorrow from our guest speaker.
I was amazed when I read this piece at how ambiguous the whole copyright and Fair use laws work. I learned that the only way to get a definitive answer on whether a particular use is a fair use is to have it resolved in federal court. I also learned that the scope of fair use is narrower for unpublished works because an author has the right to control the first public appearance of his expression. I guess it does make sense.
ReplyDeleteWhen reviewing this article on Fair Use and copyright laws, the two take away facts I learned were the following:
ReplyDelete1. If the judge or courts rule that the copyright owner has been deprived of income, you may be liable for infringement of fair use.
2. There is more leniency toward copying from factual works such as biographies rather than fictional works like plays or novels because the information is a benefit to the public.
Cindy Wofford
1. "Fair use" is open to interpretation, just like free speech. In court cases, judges' decisions are based on the following factors:
ReplyDelete1.the purpose and character of your use
2.the nature of the copyrighted work
3.the amount and substantiality of the portion taken
4.the effect of the use upon the potential market
2. Acknowledging the source of your material and/or using a disclaimer does not always guarantee you will not be found guilty of infringing on fair use
1. Parody falls under the category of fair use. I never really thought about a parody taking someone's work and transforming it.
ReplyDelete2. It is extremely important to think about if using someone's work will deprive them of money or offend them before copying it.
1. Copy Right laws are very complex and there is a lot of gray area in determining if it is okay to copy something or not. If in doubt always ask before you take.
ReplyDelete2. Parodies are okay in the eyes of the law. I have always wondered how people were able to do these, especially people like Wierd Al. It's good to know that he had permission.
The copy right laws are very ambiguous and unclear. There are two fair use categories.
ReplyDelete1. Commentary and criticism
2. Parody
The less you use of an article, the more likely your copying will be excused as fair use.
It is also critical you do not deprive the author of income
This article was pretty interesting. Since we're all in the business of "borrowing" others works in our daily teachings, we need to know how much is too much. I feel that fair use is a great thing for us, but I also think that parts of it are more favorable to the author. In most cases, this makes sense, but how are you supposed to know if three lines or three pages are too much? The example at the end seemed to be a little vague. I guess I'll just parody everything, that way I can use as much as I want, as long as it's funny. Right?
ReplyDelete1. Copyright and fair use laws are very subjective and are a gray area to many.
ReplyDelete2. I thought the area of parody was interesting because I never thought of it as a copyright issue. A comic can take a large portion of work and as long as it's placed within the context of a parody it falls within free use.
The two major reasons that a person might get sued for copyright infringement are:
ReplyDelete• Your work causes the owner of the original work to lose money.
• Thecopyright owner is offended by your use.
(Do I have to acknowledge that I copied the two bullets from the article or is the passage short enough that I am not infringing on the writer’s rights?)
Mary Jo
1. There are many aspects of fair use laws that can be confusing to many people.
ReplyDelete2. the amount that you use that reason for using the material is important.
1. It seems like we walk a fine line, as teachers, concerning transformative use because there are no hard and fast rules, only general rules and varying court decisions.
ReplyDelete2. It wasn't much of a concern for me in the past, but listening to our guest speaker and reading the article, I'm now going to be better informed in my decision making in making assignments for my students.
1. Parody falls under the fair use laws. A fairly extensive amount of the original may be used without violating the copyright laws. Unlike the other fair use laws, parody is the only one that will allow you to use so much of the original.
ReplyDelete2. The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work is another fair use factor that caught my eye. This one makes the most sense to me.
After reading "Fair Use for Teachers" from the Stanford Libraries two of the things I learned were:
ReplyDelete1. The issue of copyright is more complex than I had originally thought. When I read about the case where an author used a Dr. Seuss like approach, it was considered a satire, not a parody, therefore it was not fair use.
2. The 5th factor, "Are you good or bad"? A judge may be offended and based on that consider issue as not fair use.
I am trying to see if my comment is posted.
ReplyDeleteThere was so much about copyright that I did not know and was not aware!
ReplyDelete1. Educational use of material...what does and doesn't qualify as proper educational use.
2. You can reproduce something as long as it doesn't alter the original creator's income/credit for that creation.
1.It is interesting for me to hear more on the copyright law and teach my students.
ReplyDelete2. I read about the copyright law don't think I really understand it well when I signed.
1. Even if it's a small part of the piece your copying or taking, if it's the "heart" of the work, then you could be breaking copyright rules.
ReplyDelete2. Another factor for making sure you don't break copyright rules is to make sure you are not effected the potential market for the copyrighted work.
1. Fair use is extremely vague.
ReplyDelete2. One is violating fair use if the "heart" of an idea is used.
I plan on using this document with my students.
I learned that: 1) even a minute change in a borrowed work or passage may qualify it as a "fair use" of copyrighted material. I didn't know this; 2) The rule--less is more--is not necessarily true in parody cases.
ReplyDelete