|
ESL Forum:
Techniques and methods
in Language Teaching
Games, activities
and teaching ideas
Grammar and
Linguistics
Teaching material
Concerning
worksheets
Concerning
powerpoints
Concerning online
exercises
Make suggestions,
report errors
Ask for help
Message board
|
ESL forum >
Concerning worksheets > "FAIR USE" is good for images, but not for ´layouts ´?
"FAIR USE" is good for images, but not for ´layouts ´?
|
|
redcamarocruiser
|
So, after reading all of the posts so far on the topic of sharing templates vs. stealing them, I am impressed with the generosity of the members who are willing to license their work under creative commons or public domain.
For those who prefer to protect the fruits of their hard labor, I understand.
There seems to be one misunderstanding regarding the fair use of copyrighted free images, at least in the United States.
Fair use applies to face to face instruction or closed online courses for which a limited number of students enroll with a password (so it is not open to everyone). The uploaded materials must be removed (deleted) from the server at teh completion of the online course, even if the teacher will ofer the same course next term. The materials may not be left on (stored on) the server.
Also only a part of the work may be uploaded, a part that does not infringe on or diminish the financial gain of the artist.
The fact that an image is made freely available to create worksheets for classroom use (face to face instruction) is not a permission to publish the images online. We must always check whether the copyright owner has granted permission to make derivative works using his clip art.
Some sites offering supposedly "free" clip art of cartoon characters like the Simpsons or Winnie the Pooh images are actually not authorized by the creator of the image and are both trademark protected and copyright protected. I know because I contacted the producers of teh Simpson ´s show to request permission to use Simpson ´s clip art. The producers said that permission is routinely always denied.
It is always necessary to do your research yourself about a particular clip art you want to use. For example, I watched an educational video about copyright produced by a copyright lawyer. In his instructional video, he claimed that Winnie the Pooh was now in the pubic domain. But my own research discovered that Disney now owns the rights. It is a billion dollar industry for them. So, we have to be careful and not assume that material is fair use (fair dealing in the UK) online, even if it is considered fair use in a face to face teaching situation.
Here is a starting point for people interested in copyright http://nelliemuller.blip.tv/search?q=nellie+deutsch+copyright . She has two videos at bliptv on copyright. One is the original video that claimed Winnie the Pooh is in the public domain, and the other is a wiziq course she hosted where the copyright lawyer who created the video spoke on copyright.
Bob Diotalevi is the name of the copyright lawyer. When I sent him an article from a law journal saying that Winnie the Pooh was not in the public domain, he answered me with a link to a more recent article with more information on it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/sep/30/winnie-the-pooh-disney-law-suit
So, user beware I guess. We can ´t just take someone ´s word for it. Many thanks to all the responses in this interesting discussion.
And many thanks to all the people who freely share their work including templates. Thank you very much!
|
15 Dec 2009
|
|
|
Bruna Dutra
|
I just thought others were joking, as it was not me who said it. But then, I saw some things being reported that really made me think, wooow! this is really the way in here!
Unfortunately, not everyone would say "I borrowed it". Many people take credit from others and that ´s unfair, yes. I don ´t even question the COMPLETE COPIES, if the creator doesn ´t want to allow, it ´s his/her right. Ok. But where do copies and inspirations part ways? I used to think it was clear to me, but it ´s not what I see sometimes.
And the clothes analogy is good, so for example, I have borrowed complete outfits, mainly from my sisters when I think they look great, and if I copy a hairstyle the hair is still mine!? hehehehe. I don ´t mean to be sarcastic, just real. He who has never copied anything and is a true original work of nature (afff), throw the first rock! We all get ideas from somewhere (some-who?!), so where do copies and inspirations part ways?
It would be enough if we just define that. Then everyone will keep up the good work.
|
15 Dec 2009
|
|
|
redcamarocruiser
|
To answer the questions Bruadutra asked:
brunadutra
I
appreciate all the replies, but so far, nobody has answered my two
questions, they ´re yes or no questions, really simple. If you ´re kind
enough to tell me why, I appreciate even more.
1. When we use
copyrighted material (like ´cleaning ´ a picture from a magazine or
book), for educational, non-profitable use, like in here) we are
protected by fair use, right?
No, you are not protected by fair use when uploading a document to a publicly viewable site online. Only if it is a closed course with a limited enrollment and protected by an enrollment password.
2. When we use a layout/template/style from someone here (even if not copyrighted), we ´re not, is that it?
There is actually no such thing as a non-copyrighted work unless the copyright has expired or been relinquished by the copyright owner in the 121 countries who have signed the Bern Convention. The creator of intellectual property be it images or text etc. does not have to write the copyright symbol on his work or claim copyright. The very fact that it is captured in some tangible medium (document, web page, file etc.) gives it copyright automatically. So the rules not to use templates under free use is upheld by the law.
http://www.enotes.com/biz-encyclopedia/berne-convention has more information. "Automatic copyright protection is the central feature of the Berne
accord. If a country is a signatory to the Berne Convention that
country must extend to citizens of other member countries the same
copyright protection and restrictions it extends to its own citizens.
If, however, the person responsible for the intellectual content of a
work is not a citizen of a member country and his or her work is
published or used commercially in a Berne Convention member country,
that person ´s work is protected only to the extent covered by the
copyright laws in its country of origin." is an excerpt from the Berne accord on copyright.
Mary Ziller
Thanks to everyone at this site for all their hard work and for this discussion thread.
(the end of Brunadutra ´s post):
As
a moderator, I want to vote properly, or even refrain from voting if it
´s the case, but I feel I can ´t until someone solve my doubts.
THANKS sincerely to all you guys!
|
15 Dec 2009
|
|
|
Bruna Dutra
|
Dear Mary!
Thank you very much for your time and your thorough explanation.
It has truly answered all my doubts, plain and simply (well, not so simply as it is a complicated thing).
But it raised another one, so everyone who has copyrighted graphics (famous people pics, clipart without buying the license, etc) is against the law too? Is there any implication to it?
I will stick to these two matters - ALLOWED AND NOT ALLOWED examples for moderators, and Gabitza ´s idea of a LAYOUT/TEMPLATE section.
Thank you again, Mary, it has really helped me to understand many things.
Hugs from Brazil.
Bruna
|
15 Dec 2009
|
|
< Previous
1
2
3
|
