What IS 'fair use' in the digital age

[Marko]

I do realize that laws on these things are changing all the time but the term 'fair use' is being thrown around quite a bit these days.

Both You tube and Wikipedia are 2 enormous sources of info which show other people's work WITHOUT their express permission and use the term 'fair use' to defend their actions.
Here's Wikipedia's definition of the term http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

The first line from that link is : Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_copyright_law) that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as use for scholarship or review.

From my understanding this suggests that I can post any image I want on this site so long as i post it to learn from it or talk about it in an educational way.

I also found this document which seems to suggest a similar principal for Canadian work as well. http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrksv/cipo/cp/copy_gd_protect-e.html#6

Any opinions ?

many thanks!
marko

[tegan]

I do realize that laws on these things are changing all the time but the term 'fair use' is being thrown around quite a bit these days.

Both You tube and Wikipedia are 2 enormous sources of info which show other people's work WITHOUT their express permission and use the term 'fair use' to defend their actions.
Here's Wikipedia's definition of the term http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

The first line from that link is : Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_copyright_law) that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as use for scholarship or review.

From my understanding this suggests that I can post any image I want on this site so long as i post it to learn from it or talk about it in an educational way.

I also found this document which seems to suggest a similar principal for Canadian work as well. http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrksv/cipo/cp/copy_gd_protect-e.html#6

Any opinions ?

many thanks!
marko

It is not quite that straightforward. Fair use in the US permits a broader interpretation for the use of copyright protected works without permission.

In Canada the term is more narrowly restricted. To use an example Disney sued a school board for showing one of his video movies to the students. The board argued fair use for educational purposes. Disney argued that the teachers were on strike, so educational use did not apply. The board lost to the tune of $60,000.

Educational purposes in Canada seems to be narrowly restricted to a classroom or private personal learning via research and even then in a very specific sense of teacher/student interaction. I would be hesitant to believe that this exemption could be extended to the situation of posting any image(other than by a member) on a site for educational discussion. The more public nature of the web is a big difference from some students in a classroom.

Tegan

[Marko]

There is A LOT of grey here and this is all changing as we speak - case by case country by country. It would be a VERY interesting time to be an intelluctual-propery lawyer.

Here is the full Canadian copyright act and a quick glance through the fair dealing part should just how grey it is, ESPECIALLY when it comes to the web.
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-42/index.html

[tegan]

There is A LOT of grey here and this is all changing as we speak - case by case country by country. It would be a VERY interesting time to be an intelluctual-propery lawyer.

Here is the full Canadian copyright act and a quick glance through the fair dealing part should just how grey it is, ESPECIALLY when it comes to the web.
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-42/index.html

Yes, it depends on how criticism and study is interpreted. Originally it meant book and movie reviews done in a newspaper or magazine. Whether it can be extended to posting a photo for review or critique, irrespective of the source...... I don't know. There are some differences. You are modifying the photo to upload it and that modification could affect any critique. Book and movie reviews are generally done by experienced professionals. Criticism of photos may be done by those on a different lower level.

Tegan

[Marko]

It's interesting though that's for sure. Obviously I don't want to put the site at risk by doing silly things but I think a strong case can be made that putting any photo up here to critique it 'could' constitute fair use.

[AcadieLibre]

Ok here is an interesting article from the NY Times from Dec.6 2007 I was trying to recall the artists name and it finally came to me, Richard Prince (Insomnia can do wonders when your bored and having nothing better to do so it let me recall his name lol), this is called Appropriation Art. I will post the link and those who are interested have a read and let me know what you think. I have a strong opinion on this but before I spew my rhetoric prefer others read and come to their own conclusions lol. Think this ties in with what is considered fair use. And I have no doubt if you are using art and critiquing it, it falls into the fair use. I do get your hesitation though, who needs the headache of a take down order and threat when your just a small website.

Appropriation Art (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/06/arts/design/06prin.html?_r=2&scp=3&sq=photographer+close%20up&st=nyt&oref=slogin&oref=slogin)

[tegan]

Just to point out that "fair use" in the U.S. is more widely interpreted legally than it is in Canada.

The example I gave about the use of a Disney video in classroom shows just how narrowly it is interpretted in Canada.

So, what might be considered "fair use" in the US would not necessarily be "fair use" in Canada.

Tegan

[Marko]

Ok here is an interesting article from the NY Times from Dec.6 2007 I was trying to recall the artists name and it finally came to me, Richard Prince (Insomnia can do wonders when your bored and having nothing better to do so it let me recall his name lol), this is called Appropriation Art. I will post the link and those who are interested have a read and let me know what you think. I have a strong opinion on this but before I spew my rhetoric prefer others read and come to their own conclusions lol. Think this ties in with what is considered fair use. And I have no doubt if you are using art and critiquing it, it falls into the fair use. I do get your hesitation though, who needs the headache of a take down order and threat when your just a small website.

Appropriation Art (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/06/arts/design/06prin.html?_r=2&scp=3&sq=photographer+close%20up&st=nyt&oref=slogin&oref=slogin)



Wow that was interesting.... I'm obviously not a lawyer - but in my opinion, this is theft not art. At least if they were only being exhibited, ok still 'theftish' in the name of art. maybe.

But to make copies for sale...how is this fair use? To me it is clearly UNfair use.

[AcadieLibre]

Wow that was interesting.... I'm obviously not a lawyer - but in my opinion, this is theft not art. At least if they were only being exhibited, ok still 'theftish' in the name of art. maybe.

But to make copies for sale...how is this fair use? To me it is clearly UNfair use.

I could not agree more, it is out right theft and people buy this at such exorbitant prices I just don't get. It is not fair use it is jut theft.

[cdanddvdpublisher]

It's amazing to me how many people will change one detail or two details about something and call it their own... Fair use is one thing (one thing that can be difficult to define), but "borrowing" and selling is another thing altogether.