Soon after adorning my blog with images found offline, I was informed by Associate Professor Scott Mair that everything that takes a form is copyrighted. In other words, one needs permission to use pictures, words, artwork, or photographs. But, surely if you can download something from off Google, it's ok to use? Apparently not.
However there are exceptions to the rule -- the fair use doctrine. The rules to this rule seem kind of confusing though too -- as confusing as copyrighted material. Copyright.gov puts it like this, "When it is impracticable to obtain permission, use of copyrighted material should be avoided unless the doctrine of fair use would clearly apply to the situation."
Fair use includes things like for educational purposes, or as long as you only use a portion of the piece. You can read the rules here. Apparently attributing your sources isn't good enough. From the looks of things, fair use might not be good enough either.
The National Union of Journalists recently reviewed Ian Hargreaves' Report on Copyright. According to journalist and blogger Jon Slattery, it got mixed reviews but freelance organizer John Toner said,“We are pleased that the report rejects the so-called ‘fair use’ doctrine which is based on questionable notions of fairness. The doctrine, which comes from United States law, permits the use of a creator’s work without permission and requires potentially huge legal costs for a successful challenge."
The review puts Google on the spot -- more importantly how Google claims that scanning millions of books is fair use.
But is this report really going to improve freelance journalism, like the NUJ claims? Journalists will have more protection of their own works, but less access to other material that can enhance their own material. While this might not directly affect journalists in the US, it's always worth knowing other countries' rules on copyright laws.
No comments:
Post a Comment