To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.eduOpen lugnet.edu in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Education / 235
234  |  236
Subject: 
Re: Permission Req'd for Education?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.edu
Date: 
Sun, 29 Aug 2004 14:17:19 GMT
Highlighted: 
(details)
Viewed: 
5793 times
  
In lugnet.general, Darrell Urbien wrote:
   In lugnet.general, Johannes Koehler wrote:
   Hello bad boy!


I wondered how a pic of my creation was in the recent galleries although I didn’t upload anything new to my folder :-) I’m glad my creations are inspiration for you. It would have been nice, though, if you had added a txt-file with the credits or links to the respective builders and their folders. I’d like to know who the owners of some of the creations in your inspiration folder are.


Thanks
Jojo


Hi, given the subject matter of the above post, I have a question. I think I know the answer, but I’ll ask anyway as I’m relatively new to this topic..

What is the protocol for using Images and/or MOCs for Educational purposes? In other words, do I have to get written permission to use someone else’s MOC in a lesson? The lesson would probably include some kind of printed handout or instructions. Of course the work would be credited to the author in my handout. But I’m concerned whether I need to get formal permission for use in a classroom first. For example, my students may not be as honest about who originated the work, which could prove sticky later.


It is always the most polite and least risky thing to do to ask permission to use images that you yourself did not create. However, it is not necessarily unlawful to use them if you don’t (in the United States, at least, other countries may have different rules).


   In the past, I have always gotten permission before I presented AFOL stuff in my class, and I’ve tried to give full credit where credit was due. But this Semester I’m really expanding the LEGOness of my class, and I was hoping to include more photos.. Perhaps even post them on a class website. I would have preferred it if I had written permission from all the authors.. But I don’t right now. Is this required by law? Or is it just the “right thing to do”?


It could be both, and depends a lot on specificly what you do. Sometimes, it is absolutely lawful even when the copyright owner would be vehemently opposed to your using the material. This happens in parody, for the most part. If you, for instance, wanted to critice McDonalds for using beef from an inhumane processing plant, you might take a image of Ronald McDonald and photoshop him into a meat packing plant. McDonalds would hate you, (and probably sue you), but you would also probably have good standing under the law.

   I know I couldn’t reproduce something off of a commercial website. But if the work appears in a public forum such as LUGNET or BrickShelf - where they are provided for sharing - students have access to the images anyway. I suppose I could just link to them and have the students themselves commit the “crime” - if there is any.. I’m asking whether the added step of me providing the image in the context of a class somehow makes me liable if an original author later cries foul. OR does the fact I’m using it for Education exempt me?


No, just using something for Education doesn’t exempt you. For instance, you cannot make whole copies of textbooks for each member of your class. Also, it doesn’t matter much under the law whether you are illegally copying commercial or non-commercial material, that just affects your likelyhood of being sued for it (non-commercial endeavors have smaller pockets, and might not want to fight you in court).

Nor does the public forum of Brickshelf protect you. However, it would be perfectly legal to send your students to Brickshelf to see the images for themselves. The students wouldn’t be commiting any crime (in fact, if you had sent them to commit a crime, you wouldn’t escape culpability) because the images have been put there by the copyright owner, so there is an implied liscence to view them in that forum.

   This happens with other forms of info too - for example, if an instructor Xeroxed something out of a textbook - even something as small as a chart or graph - and included that in a handout packet, that’s supposed to be illegal. But it happens all the time in college classes.


Anyone is allowed to take small exerpts of copyrighted works (such as a chart in a handout) and use them for various things. So, when this happens in college classes its not illegal. The education component here does help, as it is one of the explicit reasons listed under the copyright code for fair use--which is the use of other people’s copyrighted material without permission.

   Anyone have an opinion/know the facts about this?

Darrell

Unfortunately, the people at the RIAA and MPAA have entered into giant media campaigns to distort the public opinion on copyright. Most of their rhetoric has been focused on the illegality of downloading songs and movies from the internet for personal use (rightly shown as illegal). However, thier campaign has seriously undermined the public’s understanding of the fair use doctrine of copyright law.

The fair use doctrine used to be a common law doctrine (meaing there was no law about it, per se, but rather a set of court rulings to suport it). However, now there is actual law to define it:

http://fairuse.stanford.edu/primary_materials/codes/92chap1.html#107

The four items you need to consider are listed in the law:

1) How you are using it.

Are you only profitting from the use and not adding to the public good? If so, it is probably not fair use. However, courts will try to balance between the public good you provide and the commercial impact on the copyright holder. Also, are you clearly exercising some measure of free speech? If you can show a compelling free speech claim, you probably win. The first ammendment is constitutional and often trumps them copyright laws.

2) The nature of the work.

This just allows for the fact that a book is different than a record, and that the markets, as well as kinds of use of these things are different for different media. If you need to think about this section, you probably need a lawyer.

3) The amount you used compared to the whole.

There are some things that can be used in part, like a book, and some things that cannot, like a statue. There are some things that have to be copied in whole in order for you to make fair use of it, and some things that do not. This is intricately tied up into how you are using it, but in general the idea is take no more than you need in order to communicate your point.

4) The effect on the market.

This is the no harm, no foul part. It is particularly important for Brickshelf photos and AFOL MOCs, most of which are shared freely. Without any kind of commercial harm, you are more likely to be able to show fair use. The copyright owner has little recourse when they are not losing money because of your use, but take care, the commercial value can be thought of in different ways. If you use a MOC or a photo of a MOC that is not your own, and you somehow are decreasing the fame or reputation of the copyright owner, then you can be liable here as well.


So, what should you do?

Avoid being sued. Face it, being sued sucks, and you don’t want the shame, hassle, and cost unless the issue is really important to you. That is why you should get permission if at all possible. AFOLs probably can’t afford a laywer any more than you can, so I wouldn’t worry about them, but Lego has lawyers, so take care if you use thier stuff. (They have a nice fair play doctrine, which defines what you have to do to get sued, which is nice: http://www.lego.com/eng/info/fairplay.asp)

Be polite. Worse than being sued (and more likely), people will complain about you publicly if you use their stuff without permission. You don’t need written permission (that only helps when you get sued, and the point is to avoid that) but an email permission is nice, becuase you can remind the copyright holder later that they said you could use it.

Always give accredation. Sometimes getting permission isn’t possible. In this case, accredation shows the rest of the world that you care. Also, it gives the copyright holder more publicity, which is (for AFOLs in general) probably more valuable than the copyrights themselves. In any case, accredation is the right thing to do. I especially liek to give accredation to people who take pictures of my MOCs because there are so many people out there with better photography skills than I have.

Don’t take advantage. Don’t use too much. Don’t try any an entire website, for instance. Keep in mind how what you do is affecting the copyright owner. If it might affect them in a bad way, make sure to contact them. (Copying an entire website often causes a lot of bandwidth problems for the owner. Its not a copyright issue per se, but it is a concern.)

I hope this little bit helps.

-Alfred



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Permission Req'd for Education?
 
Hi, Thanks so much for the thoughtful and informative response. You basically confirmed what I had suspected - better for me to get permission before I include unauthorized AFOL imagery in my class material. But given the web-savvy most students (...) (20 years ago, 30-Aug-04, to lugnet.edu, FTX)

3 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR