Loading ...What is legally classified as Fair Use? It’s a question that is puzzling to many. With the number of content producers increasing as a result of the Internet, it is even more important that the issue of Fair Use is understood.
To clarify, WebProNews spoke with Pat Aufderheide, the Executive Director for the Center of Social Media at American University, and Attorney Michael Donaldson of Donaldson & Callif. According to Aufderheide, Fair Use is a part of copyright law that gives people the right to use other people’s copyrighted material without licensing it, paying for it, or even asking permission for it. However, there are circumstances in which Fair Use is misused.
As Donaldson explains, Fair Use is rooted in the First Amendment. He says, “If you keep in mind the First Amendment origins of Fair Use, you’ll have a good starting point.”
If your argument of Fair Use is tested in court, judges will ask if material was used in a way that was different from the original, and if the material was used in a way to produce a profit. To be legal, it must be used in a free speech way and not a way that takes market value from the original.
Bloggers often receive grief from mass media in regards to quotes and other material. Some of the grief is merited since some bloggers simply copy and paste an article into their blog. While the law is probably not in favor of this usage, bloggers do have the right to pull some quotes, images, and video from publishers, as long as they are used in the right context.
Although the law is vague, Aufderheide says, “I don’t think this is such a thorny area of expression as it might seem..”
How do you interpret Fair Use?
Pingback: Are You Blogging Within Your Fair Use Rights? - News: Everything-e
Pingback: Are You Blogging Within Your Fair Use Rights? | Money Maker Academy
What a great video – as a website developer and streaming video producer I have always been challenged by what I can or cannot use in our productions and this video really clarifies it for me. What I’m getting is that the most important points are – 1. don’t steal stuff to take away someone else’s material to make more money and to prevent them from earning and 2. use common sense in using stuff ‘within the right context’ to illustrate your point in a new way and that should be ok.
I wonder though how the first amendment point mentioned in the video would apply outside the USA – e.g. in Canada?
Pingback: Are You Blogging Within Your Fair Use Rights? | China Tea & Chinese Tea
Simply a fantastic discussion! As a blogger, my opinion has been that if you site the source properly and put the material into perspective, you would stand high on moral ground.
In other words, approach it the same way you would approach preparing a college or graduate level research paper. Don’t assume the credit for someone else’s work.
I suppose that if someone were to use a compare and contrast argument to formulate a new opinion, you could use just about anything without asking.
It’s interesting that this falls under the First Amendment. …but, don’t steal someone’s work. That’s plagarism. And, we see that all too frequently!
Rick
Pingback: What is legally classified as Fair Use
This is very helpful to me as a publisher. I am in the process of publishing an article and English translation of a work by a Catholic priest, a political dissident, in Vietnam. Just as your video came up I am struggling over how to copyright the publications for him. I am planning to copyright the article and translation for the author in the U. S. with my publishing name, Allies for Freedom publishers.
The dilemma: how to extend permission for others to put the online version on their websites. We are not selling the article (it is a history of a prominent political prisoner, another dissident priest). We do want the article to be published widely as long as credit is given to the author and it is not used for someone’s commercial gain without permission, i.e., an online newspaper site or blog that is a commercial enterprise, just as your video interview with Dr. Aufderheide and Attorney Donald explained. We want the online article and translation to be published in full.
I am planning to publish the article and translation in print form, properly with ISBN, etc. Proceeds are not commercial — they will be sold at a level to cover printing costs. The purpose is distribution of the work as widely as possible to help political prisoners in Vietnam, who are imprisoned for advocating for their right to free speech on the Internet.
Therefore, what kind of statement can be made with the copyright notice of the online article that allows immediate republication in full and protects the author and publisher from clipping-style publication that does not credit the source?
Pingback: Are You Blogging Within Your Fair Use Rights? | 7Soc
this is a very useful link
The use of another’s written work in total – or the use of 100 per cent of another’s work – is not considered “fair use.” I have heard several who believe otherwise – but we have precedents.
Pingback: Are You Blogging Within Your Fair Use Rights? | Services For Seo
What is the fair use
Online content is no different than print and the same rules should apply. WSJ is a pay service and people that actually read WSJ say it’s the best paper. Probably cause it’s well funded. This is all about money and if as a community are not careful with copyright and intelectual property everything worth reading will become pay service.
I think any blog that has ads or generates revenue another way should revenue share or pay a yearly or article fee to use the article maybe a few dollars am article or yearly access fee. That is fair. You cannot replay news from tv or reprint from a book without permission why do people think online should be different other than it is easier.
We are on shacky grounds and publishers have been kind until mow a happy medium between both sides must be found.
Pingback: Video: Legal Steps to Protect Your Content
Pingback: Web Pro News at SXSW | Donaldson & Callif
Pingback: Legal Steps to Protect Your Content | BrettMBell.com
Wow Very Good Your Information I like it…….
wow I like it…….this site is very wonderfulllllllllllllllllllllll
I think as a democratic society we need to be careful about restricting access to information. The current trend seems to be to prevent people from sharing information unless they are prepared to pay a fee for it. Information/knowledge is powerful. We must not keep it hidden. As a musician, I’ve discovered that there are fewer places for musicians to perform because ASCAP and BMI have been fining public places that allow musicians to play “cover” songs. In other words, a 15 year-old kid who plays an old Jimi Hendrix song at an open mic in a coffee shop is considered to be in violation with copyright laws. From my view, as a musician, writer and filmmaker who’s been creating since I was a child, that is just silly. I want others to see my films, read my writing, hear my music, as long as I get credit for it and as long as someone doesn’t make money off of my work by claiming it is his/her own. Copyright laws were supposed to protect the artist so that he/she could share the art without worrying someone else would steal it. All throughout history artists–including the greatest ones of all time–have “stolen” ideas from other artists. Great art is built upon current and past art. Artists can’t help but share with and be influenced by each other. I think the problem comes in when artists lose control of their work and a corporation becomes the “owner” of the art. Then profit–not self-expression–becomes the goal. Ironically, that is leading toward curtailing freedom of speech and reducing the amount of good art we’ll all have access too. In order for the great musician to develop, he/she has to have the freedom to play the Jimi Hendrix song in the coffee shop till he/she develops his/her own style. I hope more people will begin to realize the importance of art of all forms in our society and of our ability to share it amongst each other.
The dreadiest enemy of fair used [The Queen Anne/Margrethe II Valdemarsdatter March 03,1963 Absolute Wills Crown Copyright Advocacy of 1975 United Nations Tribunal]… was this indiscriminate proliferations of pretending royals comprises of commoners..allegedly calling themselves queen and queen, duke and duchess,crown princesses an…d crown princes of which legal terms and definitions itself derived from legal dictionaries are criminally breach. Of which media had created a hallucinations of mass flatteries all over internet and television of identity thieveries and hysteria of frauds.
What kind of Fair use has… of this fraud originators of puppetries and royalty wannabes in billions of fraud collaboration of this organized identity thieves… all over encyclopaedias..to the extent of using a royal confidential files in the archives for their puppetry and fraud personal corrupt agenda.
Very nice article! It’s absolutely a wonderful guideline. I really appreciate you for posting it.
Thanks for the info.
Please keep the info flowing about this!
If your argument of Fair Use is tested in court, judges will ask if material was used in a way that was different from the original, and if the material was used in a way to produce a profit. To be legal, it must be used in a free speech way and not a way that takes market value from the original.
I really relate to that post. Thanks for the info.
Pingback: Michael Donaldson and Lisa Callif - Interview
Thanks for the sensible critique. Me & my neighbor were just preparing to do some research on this. We got a grab a book from our area library but I think I learned more from this post. I’m very glad to see such excellent info being shared freely out there.
These types of are getting good all over again routines that enables us to chill out your backbone and likewise sleep accordingly without the expertise pertaining to difficulties inside of your just as before.