I am bummed that I wasn't in this week's Wimba. The interaction and topic of Copyright and Fair Use were really interesting. I learned something new as well. I did not know that it wasn't Fair Use if the content of the lesson being taught could still be successfully taught without the copyrighted item. I would think that 99% of content presented in that case are in violation of the Fair Use law. I think too that it could be interpreted by different people in many different ways.
When the topic of copyright comes up in my class, I always refer to the "man on the street" rule. If someone with no graphic design or technical training feels that two images bear a striking resemblance to each other, it is reasonable to assume that a copyright infringement has occurred (Luttropp, Greenwald, 2009). It seems too that copyright infringement is being enforced on more popular venues. This was the second time I had heard that YouTube contacted someone for a violation. If in the video you credited the artist as we do in our assignments, I wonder if they would still contact you? Has anyone had this happen? I did a video 2-3 classes ago and used a poem by another author, but I did credit her at the beginning and the end. It was also a really old and random piece. I was not contacted about violating any laws.
Creative Commons and the like would probably be your best bet for sources. Or you could create you own as someone mentioned. It is easy in the age of technology and accessibility to grab from the Internet and run. As instructors and role models perhaps we should recondition ourselves to play by the rules. That would be the easiest way to solve the problem.
Greenwald, M. and Luttrop, J. (2009). Graphic design and technology through the ages. Designing for print production: Essential concepts (pp. 30-31). Clifton Park, New York: Delmar.
Ginny, I like your "man on the street" rule. That is a great way to explain copyright. If you think about it, if it were to go to court, a jury would have to decide if the work was infringing and I always think of the Vanilla Ice vs. Queen where Vanilla Ice and DJ Earthquake allegedly sampled the bass-line from "Under Pressure."
ReplyDeleteEven though there was a one note difference, the jury or "man on the street" thought it was close enough to be an infringing work.
Like you, I support the CC but I also feel that we need a healthy public domain. CC is a second best solution and Copyrights and I am against allowing Copyrights to be handed down to generations of family members. This discourages the creation of new works and promotes the idle rich class.
It is interesting to me to see how a graphic designer might approach copyright issues differently than a non-designer. The question of man-on-the-street similarity test is interesting because part of what makes modern art "art" may not be discernible by the untrained eye (see http://jbbsedtechplace.com/2011/01/definitions-of-contemporarymodern-art-fair-use/).
ReplyDelete