Subject:
|
Re: Permission Req'd for Education?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.edu
|
Date:
|
Sun, 29 Aug 2004 14:17:19 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
5798 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
|
|
|
|
