DJM 

As a college faculty member, it frequently is perplexing that there are a lot of resources out there that could be helpful in teaching, but there is not always a clear understanding about what can and cannot legitimately be used without a breach of a copyright law.  Copyright 101  is a great source of basic copyright information. It explains terms and concepts that can usually confuse a copyright expert. 

 

Copyright laws leave most of us struggling about the use or misuse of things we have accessed on the internet, textbooks, movies, or music. Thinking that "we" (faculty)  can use something for our classes because we are teachers, and our choices are "for the good of our students" is not good enough. In order for faculty to model ethical behavior in the usage of another's work we need to be aware of what the rules are so we practice Fair Use well enough for our students to learn the value of giving credit when credit is due. Apply the four Fair Use criteria that can be found at: http://www.tfaoi.com/articles/andres/aa6.htm. This is a great place to start, and then be sure to check out the 10 myths listed in Leslie Salces entry noted below.

 

Holly W. 5/28/10

I created a WebQuest for students to explore the issues associated with Fair Use and Creative Commons. By spending some time and going through it, I think educators will also learn a great deal. Here's the link: http://www.slideshare.net/wall530/fair-use-and-creative-commons-webquest-1679134 I hope you find it helpful and maybe even consider using it in your classrooms. 

 

Creative Commons (capohanka)

 

Since this issue is so complex I'd like to build on Alphana's summary of the TEACH ACT by adding another resource. This one was prepared by an attorney and expert in the area of copyright.

 

Distance Education and the TEACH Act

http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=Distance_Education_and_the_TEACH_Act&Template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=25939

This resource was prepared for the American Library Association (ALA) by Kenneth D. Crews, Professor of Law and  Director, of the Copyright Management Center Indiana University School of Law-Indianapolis.  The expertise is important because of the complexity of some of the ethical questions involving copyright law and distance education.

The resource summarizes the new standards and requirements established by the TEACH Act.  Professor Crews isolates the various requirements and benefits of the new law and organizes them in a manner that may be helpful to educators and others seeking to understand and comply with the law. Crews l also suggest strategies and implementation methods that an educational institution may choose to follow.

 

Here are some benefits of TEACH?

·         Expanded range of allowed works. The new law permits the display and performance of nearly all types of works. The law no longer sweepingly excludes broad categories of works, as did the former law. However, a few narrow classes of works remain excluded, and uses of some types of works are subject to quantity limitations.

·         Expansion of receiving locations. The former law limited the transmission of content to classrooms and other similar location. The new law has no such constraint. Educational institutions may now reach students through distance education at any location.

·         Storage of transmitted content. The former law often permitted educational institutions to record and retain copies of the distance-education transmission, even if it included copyrighted content owned by others. The new law continues that possibility. The law also explicitly allows retention of the content and student access for a brief period of time, and it permits copying and storage that is incidental or necessary to the technical aspects of digital transmission systems.

·         Digitizing of analog works. In order to facilitate digital transmissions, the law permits digitization of some analog works, but in most cases only if the work is not already available in digital form.

None of these benefits, however, is available to educators unless they comply with the many and diverse requirements of the law.

The rights of use are also often limited to certain works, in limited portions, and only under rigorously defined conditions.

Another useful resource:  Copyright Law in Cyberspace

http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualProperty/distance.htm

 

CopyrightLaws – Lesly Salces

I found a lot of interesting information about copyright laws while reading my classmates’ postings. I came across an article about copyright myths which I found to be straight forward and helped to clear some of the misconceptions about this topic. I’m going to share some of the myths with the hope to clarify what we already know or thought we knew. I have listed six myths regarding copyright and towards the end a summary of every single one so we can have a better idea. I was surprised when I read some of the myths. I feel like I’ve violated some of those laws without knowing. If I want good citizens in my classroom that abide by the law then I need to model for them the right way to do things. A teacher made a comment to me last week saying that she spends numerous hours deleting the copyright information from booklets when she copies them because her gifted students always say to her that the handouts they are using are copyrighted. My point is that we try to teach children the right way but we do the opposite. People think that they can get away if they do it online but the laws are enforced either way. What’s worse? Not knowing you were breaking the law or breaking it and trying to get away with it? Where do we draw the line though? We sometimes copy booklets for instruction to help children learn. Is that fair use? There are some interesting points to discuss under the TEACH Act about what we are allowed to do but I don’t think educators are aware of those. How do we disseminate the information in order to allow for intelligent decisions about copyright material? The author of this article was the founder and publisher of ClariNet Communications Corp, the world’s first ever “.com” company meaning a business based on the Internet rather than one like uu.net which sold connectivity itself. It was also the net’s first and for a long time largest electronic newspaper. He founded ClariNet in 1989 in Waterloo, Ontario.  

He defines copyright as basically the legal exclusive right of the author of a creative work to control the copying of that work. He advices the readers to feel free to link to his document (10 Big Myths about copyright explained), he emphasize the fact that readers do no need to ask him which brings me to the first myth:

If it doesn't have a copyright notice, it's not copyrighted."

This was true in the past, but today almost all major nations follow the Berne copyright convention. For example, in the USA, almost everything created privately and originally after April 1, 1989 is copyrighted and protected whether it has a notice or not.

 

"If it's posted to Usenet it's in the public domain."

 

False. Nothing modern and creative is in the public domain anymore unless the owner explicitly puts it in the public domain(*). Explicitly, as in you have a note from the author/owner saying, "I grant this to the public domain." Those exact words or words very much like them.

 

 

"If I make up my own stories, but base them on another work, my new work belongs to me."

 

False. U.S. Copyright law is quite explicit that the making of what are called "derivative works" -- works based or derived from another copyrighted work -- is the exclusive province of the owner of the original work. This is true even though the making of these new works is a highly creative process. If you write a story using settings or characters from somebody else's work, you need that author's permission.

 

 

"Oh, so copyright violation isn't a crime or anything?"

 

Actually, in the 90s in the USA commercial copyright violation involving more than 10 copies and value over $2500 was made a felony. So watch out. (At least you get the protections of criminal law.) On the other hand, don't think you're going to get people thrown in jail for posting your E-mail. The courts have much better things to do. This is a fairly new, untested statute. In one case an operator of a pirate BBS that didn't charge was acquitted because he didn't charge, but congress amended the law to cover that.

 

 

They e-mailed me a copy, so I can post it."

 

To have a copy is not to have the copyright. All the E-mail you write is copyrighted. However, E-mail is not, unless previously agreed, secret. So you can certainly report on what E-mail you are sent, and reveal what it says. You can even quote parts of it to demonstrate. Frankly, somebody who sues over an ordinary message would almost surely get no damages, because the message has no commercial value, but if you want to stay strictly in the law, you should ask first. On the other hand, don't go nuts if somebody posts E-mail you sent them. If it was an ordinary non-secret personal letter of minimal commercial value with no copyright notice (like 99.9% of all E-mail), you probably won't get any damages if you sue them. Note as well that, the law aside, keeping private correspondence private is a courtesy one should usually honor.

 

 

So I can't ever reproduce anything?"

 

Copyright isn't an iron-clad lock on what can be published. Indeed, by many arguments, by providing reward to authors, it encourages them to not just allow, but fund the publication and distribution of works so that they reach far more people than they would if they were free or unprotected -- and unpromoted. However, it must be remembered that copyright has two main purposes, namely the protection of the author's right to obtain commercial benefit from valuable work, and more recently the protection of the author's general right to control how a work is used.

 

In Summary

• These days, almost all things are copyrighted the moment they are written, and no copyright notice is required.

• Copyright is still violated whether you charged money or not, only damages are affected by that.

• Postings to the net are not granted to the public domain, and don't grant you any permission to do further copying except perhaps the sort of copying the poster might have expected in the ordinary flow of the net.

• Fair use is a complex doctrine meant to allow certain valuable social purposes. Ask yourself why you are republishing what you are posting and why you couldn't have just rewritten it in your own words.

• Copyright is not lost because you don't defend it; that's a concept from trademark law. The ownership of names is also from trademark law, so don't say somebody has a name copyrighted.

• Fan fiction and other work derived from copyrighted works is a copyright violation.

• Copyright law is mostly civil law where the special rights of criminal defendants you hear so much about don't apply. Watch out, however, as new laws are moving copyright violation into the criminal realm.

• Don't rationalize that you are helping the copyright holder; often it's not that hard to ask permission.

• Posting E-mail is technically a violation, but revealing facts from E-mail you got isn't, and for almost all typical E-mail, nobody could wring any damages from you for posting it. The law doesn't do much to protect works with no commercial value

Source

Templeton, B. (October, 2008). 10 Big Myths about copyright explained. Retrieved January 27, 2010 from http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

 

Copyright Laws- Added by Kirsten Sequeira

 

In addition to the above information regarding copyright laws and the Internet, I found an interesting article about Copyright laws and images on the Internet. The article, New Law Being Made on Use of Images on the Internet was written by Ann Avery Andres, Esq.  She discusse a case where the plaintiff, Leslie Kelly has a website that offers a virtual tour of California's gold rush country. The defendant, Ditto a search engine company, took photos from Kelly's website through the use of a crawler, cut off the copyright information and used them in the Ditto search engine without permission. A federal judge stated that this was a copyright violation that fell under the "fair use" exception. "The "fair use" exception allows use of material without the permission of the owner if the purpose is for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship or research."

 

 

 

There are 4 critieria to consider states the federal law, when examining the "fair use" exception. They are as follow:

 

(1) The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

(2) The nature of the copyrighted work;

(3) The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

(4) The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.               

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         

The judge sided with the defendant, Ditto, by saying they fell within these parameters and did not intentionally delete the copyright information. Ditto uses a crawler, which automatically "crawls" the web for information to add to their search engine. Here is an article that details different search engines and how they work, titled How Search Engines Work.  "Commercial use" of images is a copyright violation. However, the term commercial use is a loosely defined term, open for interpretation. Kelly is appealing the judges decision stating his images may have been copied and used as a result of the serach engine.         

  

Ultimately, everyone needs to be careful when posting images on the World Wide Web. Just look at the name, World Wide, says it all. One never knows who is printing, using, looking at, or "mishandling" them. Until an iron clad way of tracking the use of images, including who is printing, saving, copy and pasting them, posters beware!     

 References                                                 

Andres, A. (2000) New Law Being Made on Use of Images on the Internet. Retrieved January 28, 2010 from http://www.tfaoi.com/articles/andres/aa6.htm

Unknown. (2007, March 14). How Serach Engines Work. Retrieved January 28, 2010 from http://searchenginewatch.com/2168031

                                                                                                                                                           

 

Julia Carpenter

 

The insights in this Wiki section on Copyright connect with the NETS standards on Digital Citizenship and Responsibility outlined by ISTE.   These standards clearly outline our responsibility as educators to not only teach “safe, legal and ethical use of digital information and technology” but to model this in our professional practices.  I thought I’d share :http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/2008Standards/NETS_for_Teachers_2008.htm

 

This connects with Lesley Salces’ observation in her post that a teacher spent “numerous hours deleting copyright information from booklets when she copies them because her gifted students always say to her that the handouts they are using are copyrighted…..my point is that we try to teach children the right way but we do the opposite.”   NETS indicates we must “practice what we preach” by modeling legal and ethical copyright to our students. I’m thinking about Lesley’s examples. Many teaching booklets explicitly allow copies to be made, if they are classroom sets. I was able to make legal copies of one short story because the book where they were published was out of print.  In these cases, if students ask about copyright, I could answer honestly by giving them the guidelines I followed – educating them on copyright law AND modeling ethical behavior.

 

 

4. Promote and Model Digital Citizenship and Responsibility

Teachers understand local and global societal issues and responsibilities in an evolving digital culture and exhibit legal and ethical behavior in their professional practices. Teachers:

	a)   advocate, model, and teach safe, legal, and ethical use of digital information and technology, including respect for copyright, intellectual property, and the appropriate documentation of sources.
.	b)   address the diverse needs of all learners by using learner-centered strategies providing equitable access to appropriate digital tools and resources.
	c)   promote and model digital etiquette and responsible social interactions related to the use of technology and information.
.	d)   develop and model cultural understanding and global awareness by engaging with colleagues and students of other cultures using digital-age communication and collaboration tools.

 

---

Linda Brent

In connecting with this wiki on copyright use of the internet I discovered a Microsoft site (http://www.digitalcitizenshiped.com/.   Here you will find an educational curriculum; entitled Digital Citizenship and Creative Content Curriculum, for teaching your students about creative usage rights of the digital content they have access to on the internet.

This interactive program has resources for both teachers and students. The program is divided into four units that can be used alone or in conjunction with the other units. All the units revolve around a case study. There are pre and post assessments for each unit and guiding questions to guide the students as they explore the case study.

These lessons on copyright are free but you do have to sign-up and create an account. I did this and then download the lessons to review. The content is of high interest and relative to middle and high school students, in fact this is the recommended age group for this program, but I think it could possibly be adapted for use in the upper levels of elementary school.  Example of the Case Studies – Battle of the Bands – copyrights to school videos; Stick Bombs on the Sly – a student create a video game; Beta Test Gone Haywire – a high school students creates a mini software program; A Similar Story – students submit their entries for a short story contest.

I also found this link http://homepage.mac.com/prr/copyright.html to have useful information about internet copyright and citations. It is by Phil Reinhart and it titled Copyright and Citations: What Educators Need to Know. He includes a notice at the top of the page about the site not having been updated in some time but was reposted due to popular demand.  Some of the links do not work but there are links that might be useful in reference to copyright laws. Some of the information is similiar to other information already provided by previous writers.

 

Denise Low

In EME 5207 I  created a Wet Paint website as a digital artifact.  This one in particular focuses on Educational Fair Use and other issues regarding Copyright and Creative Commons.  There is also a collection of useful glossary terms that will be helpful to understand when exploring these topics.

 

I  hope this is useful to you and the rest of the class!  Educational Fair Use and Copyright

 

Morgan Martin

 

In a previous class, i created a digital artifact displaying copyright laws in laymen's terms. I felt that something that was meaningful and in "teacher lingo" would be far more applicable for this assignment then finding another web article for us to look over. This slideshow is great, as it breaks copyright/fair use issues down into ways that apply to teachers. There is so much that i learned when studying this topic. My peers gave some great resources to go to to learn more about copyright laws. So often, teachers feel bound by the "laws" when in reality so much more is available to them, they are just uneducated about copyright laws.

 

Copyright Digital Artifact

 

Here is an article about best practices for fair. use. This article is very teacher friendly. Ive found it to be very insightful each time i refer to it. It gives specific examples and nonexamples and really makes copyright understandable for the reader. 

 

Artilce

 

 

•      In today’s society, people are getting information and resources from many illegal sources. I know that I myself am guilty of burning CD’s or downloading music from lime wire. And doing these things, for my personal use, doesn’t align with the fair use policy.
• Many teachers are afraid that they will get in trouble for copyright laws, when if they just knew the laws, they would realize that what they wanted to do was and is perfectly legal and acceptable.
• When we limit the material that we use to teach with, it limits student learning.
• Fair use needs to be put into place to protect our rights. We would never be able to improve if we didnt have help from others.
• Fair use is situational and context is critical

 

 

• Two Key Questions:

Did the unlicensed use “transform” the material taken from the copyrighted work by using it for a different purpose than that of the original, or did it just repeat the work for the same intent and value as the original?

Was the material taken appropriate in kind and amount, considering the nature of the copyrighted work and of the use?

If the answers to these two questions are “yes,” a court is likely to find a use fair.

Because that is true, such a use is unlikely to be challenged in the first place.

I believe that if we ask these two key questions that we can answer many of our own questions about if it is legal to share material. As educators, we have to be knowledgable an on the cutting edge to use every resouce we can to best meet the needs of our students. 

 

 

Julia Carpenter

 

I'm enjoying the dialogue and resources posted in this section, especially learning from each other about resources and guidelines to make the process easier.  I was thinking that one way to approach the complex issue of copyright is to research what other institutions and colleges  are doing with regard to copyright especially  distance education.  For example, Univeristy of Texas has reviewed copyright law, as well as the guidelines for CONFU http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualProperty/confu.htm to develop guidelines for university professors to follow. These guidelines are found at:

http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualProperty/copypol2.htm#image

 

The way they organize their guidelines makes sense – it asks educators to ask themselves specific questions. Here is an example of how they handle digital images:

1. Is the image you wish to digitize readily available online or for sale or license at a fair price?

·         If YES: Point to, purchase or license the image. Do not digitize it unless you are in the process of negotiating a license. If you have a "contract pending," digitize and use the image in accordance with these Rules of Thumb until the license is finalized and you have received the licensed digital image.

·         If NO: Digitize and use the image in accordance with the following limitations:

Limit access to all images except small, low resolution "thumbnails" to students enrolled in the class and administrative staff as needed. Terminate access at the end of the class term.

Faculty members also may use images at peer conferences.

Students may download, transmit and print out images for personal study and for use in the preparation of academic course assignments and other requirements for degrees, may publicly display images in works prepared for course assignments etc., and may keep works containing images in their portfolios.

2. Periodically review digital availability. If a previously unavailable image becomes available online or for sale or license at a fair price, point to or acquire it.

 

Ali Heasley

I came across this article and thought you all may find it to be of use. It discusses common copyright violations, how they can be prevented, and who is responsible. I found this interesting because upon reading this article I realized that I have seen others violate copyright or done so myself and I had no idea. Hope this helps you to have a greater understanding of how we can prevent problems with copyrighting.

http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/2a/19/74.pdf

 

 

Some quick Copyright stuff I found in article inside the Library Media Connection monthly issue.

Public Performance License and Class Showing

Question: Under the fair use guidelines and the fact that some schools have performance license, when videos are shown in the classroom, must they be connected with a teaching activity?  As a reward, can a class be shown a movie?

Answer: Keep in mind that a public perf. lic. only covers entertainment films from about a dozen producers.  It does not cover everything you might be showing.  If you can meet with the AV guidelines on that showing , you don't need public performance rights on that single showing.  Each showing must be assessed seprately.  For reward showings, you may show the film only if the producer of the film to be shown is covered under your license.  Reward showings of complete or almost complete films don't fall under the AV guidelines because they are not directly related to a teaching activity.

Interesting huh?

This section in the periodical is quite helpful and is printed every month.  This a great resource for anyone to have incase of questions similar to the one discussed above.

 

www.librarymediaconnection.com

 

Marie Jewett-Meilan

 

 

 

Shannon Hamlett

 

Do the (Copy)right Thing: A Lesson in Ethics for Non-Compliant Teachers

 

 

I was inspired by the previously posted articles about teacher behavior when it comes to copyright infringement. The Robin Hood mentality that both teachers and administrators experience seems to perpetuate the problem. While we know that what we are doing is technically wrong, we still justify our actions for various reasons, mainly because we (schools and teachers) do not have the time or money (resources) to properly borrow, purchase, or ask permission for using material. In a hurried state to prepare students for high-stakes standardized tests, we justify ignoring these laws. While the Fair Use guidelines protect many aspects of teacher use and copying of materials, these laws do not protect teachers from a growing number of subversive behaviors stemming from increased Internet usage.

 

I found the following article to help me (and others like me) feel more inclined to comply with copyright issues. I am a willing ignorer of such laws, often trying to mask my behavior so that students don’t realize that I am noncompliant with copyright laws. This article provides a strong case for compliance, which is what I needed to read as a willing violator of copyright laws. To follow is a summary of the article’s key points:

Starkman, N. (2008 March 1). Do the (Copy)right Thing. THE Journal, Retrieved from http://thejournal.com/Articles/2008/03/01/Do-the-Copyright-Thing.aspx?Page=1 .

·         The author notes that most administrators feel that complying with copyright laws is very low on the list of urgent priorities, especially in the climate of high-stakes standardized tests. In short, schools are much more concerned with students passing state tests than avoiding possible lawsuits for copyright infringement.

·         The author adds that, “without a mandate from the district or a push from principals, teachers remain inattentive to and unschooled in copyright law as well, exposing their districts to litigation and modeling unlawful behavior for their students.” In other words, administrators must train their teachers to care about this issue and make such training (and compliance) mandatory.

·         It is a wide-spread assumption that schools think they will not be sued because they are educating children. In fact, the only instruction in copyright law teachers usually receive “comes from a sign hung over the school's copy machine. “ Further, the first time that principals usually become aware of copyright law is when they are issued a cease-and-desist order. In short, administrators and teachers are both clueless about copyright laws and do not receive proper training in this area.

·         In order to change a school’s bad behavior in this area, districts/schools need to create, enforce, and educate students and teachers about the school’s or district’s copyright policy. In other words, a copyright policy must be created and communicated to everyone to ensure compliance.

·         One obstacle to compliance is that teachers do not feel that this issue is urgent and often do not attend trainings on copyright compliance when offered. The author argues that, in order to get teachers on board, you must provide worst-case-scenario examples of schools being sued and then communicate clearly the consequences for non-compliance. In other words, you must scare teachers into complying.

·         In order to get students to comply, you must explain the consequences in real-terms for them. For example, explaining that their behavior could get them kicked out of college in the near future might scare them into complying. Sharing horror stories about music file-sharing might also resonate with students. In short, you must also scare students into caring about compliance.

·         Finally, the author reminds us of the ethics behind copyright compliance. By not modeling or teaching appropriate copyright behavior, we are teaching students that stealing is okay. We would never openly admit that stealing is okay, but borrowing another’s work without giving them credit or paying for their work is essentially stealing. In other words, modeling and teaching appropriate copyright behavior is a lesson in ETHICS and one that cannot be ignored.