Important post from Joyce Valenza that should start some interesting thinking about Fair Use:
I learned on Friday night that the critical test for fairness in terms of educational use of media is transformative use. When a user of copyrighted materials adds value to, or repurposes materials for a use different from that for which it was originally intended, it will likely be considered transformative use; it will also likely be considered fair use. Fair use embraces the modifying of existing media content, placing it in new context. Examples of transformativeness might include: using campaign video in a lesson exploring media strategies or rhetoric, using music videos to explore such themes as urban violence, using commercial advertisements to explore messages relating to body image or the various different ways beer makers sell beer, remixing a popular song to create a new artistic expression.
Basically, Joyce writes about how the scope of what we can and cannot do with our students regarding reuse and remix of copyrighted materials may be much broader than we think. Read the whole thing.
I’m so glad this issue is being raised again. I had the pleasure of seeing a fairly new artist doing just this type of thing – transformative usage – in his opening act at The Blue Man Group’s concert. Long story short: he was using Led Zepplin, NWA, the Outfield and other artists work and combining them together with video and his own flavor of scratching LPs, etc. – all on the big screen for a profit.
If he can do this in the spirit of Fair Use, then I don’t understand why our students cannot, in a non-profit way, use such multimedia resources to create transformative, artistic pieces.
I’m so excited this is being discussed! Thanks Will!
For the long story: http://k12geek.com/blog/?p=136
Has anyone challenged corporations who own this sort of intellectual property and won? I only ever hear of DJs and other mash-up artists getting sued for their use of licensed material.
Doubt there are very many – I think most districts / teachers are worried about CYA and litigation. They figure it isn’t worth the possibility of trouble.
It is about time someone hit the librarians with a clue bat.
Nice.
Will,
Transforative use is still a little squishy. For example, fanfiction, the difference between transformative and derivitive is broad and gray.
FYI…did you read the Cost of Copyright Confusion?
http://www.centerforsocialmedia.org/resources/publications/the_cost_of_copyright_confusion_for_media_literacy/
I really don’t think we should be basing these conversations on anecdotes and single conference sessions…
Copyright issues seem to be very difficult for most people to understand. A lot of people aren’t able or willing to separate their concept of “what I think should be legal” from making a true assessment of what is legal and fair to the copyright holder.
The crux of copyright is that when you create something, you get control. You can control the who-what-where-when-why for publishing, performing, distributing…everything. If any of these are violated, you can seek damages. The copyright holder is in total control, because they created it.
That protects initial copyright holders, but content creators also need freedom to continue creating without fear of being sued, so there are limits on copyright. Some limits have to do with how long it takes copyright to expire. Some special cases have been identified where other interests can trump copyright protection, like certain uses for news reporting.
One of the special cases that can sometimes trump copyright is immediate classroom use. You can use a copyrighted work as an example if it fits your current class lesson or discussion, but you can’t add it to curriculum for future years or otherwise plan for future use without securing permission from the copyright holder.
All that said, the world is becoming a different place thanks to the web. Ease and prevalence of publishing has made it harder for teachers to use copyrighted materials (since they publish class materials online, they can’t include copyrighted materials as easily with class materials), but easier to find materials licensed for use.
See my first paragraph, though, and don’t take my word for it. Take a real course on Communication Law at a 4-year university.
An interesting post. Am I breaking the law of I use zamzar to convert videos and paste them together into a digital story telling project for strictly educational purposes with my students?
If i post it on a self-managed blog with an ad from ad-sense am I breaking the law?
Charlie these were EXACTLY the types of scenarios that the project is seeking to analyze and make a statement about. You should check out the work that Temple Media Lab is doing.
http://www.mediaeducationlab.com/index.php?page=265
Charlie
These were EXACTLY the type of scenarios we were asked to examine and I can’t wait until the statement comes out from this group in the Fall.
I encourage you to visit the Copyright & Fair use resources and follow what is happening at Temple Media Lab
http://www.mediaeducationlab.com/index.php?page=265
I read Joyce’s article with interest but have to wonder if this isn’t second-order thinking – requiring students to know and understand the concept of copyright as well as transformative and derivative works BEFORE they can use copyrighted works intelligently and ethically? I realize she is talking about teachers’ fair use but teachers do set the pace for their students’ use (monkey see, monkey do sort of logic there).
I think that a good starting point for students would be to use Creative Commons licensed works until they grasp these concepts, and then encourage them to practice fair use with more restrictive/commercial materials. What does everyone else think of that approach?
I was involved in the same conversation at Temple as Joyce and I too was blown away by the information shared. In the past the Guidelines have been what has made teachers feel PROTECTED. I don’t think it is fair Tom to say we are “hitting librarians with the clue bat” because there are MANY folks who are sharing those guidelines as the truth. Edh I think you hit the nail right on the head…teachers AND students need to understand these concepts:Copyright & transformative before they use ANY works.
The one thing that Peter shared that makes ME feel better about changing how I work with teachers and students was the idea that the “guidelines” were a “floor” rather than a ceiling when it comes to fair use. THIS is what we should be teaching kids about fair use… We need to teach them more that, you can use “this much” and steer them towards the higher level thinking required to state WHY they are using the work, HOW they are using the work, WHAT VALUE the work gives to them and WHAT VALUE their work gives to the copyrighted work they are using.
If you want to take a look at the information shared from an edtech view…I wrote about it as well I hope that folks will continue to contribute THEIR understanding of fair use!
Thanks Will for pointing to these conversations
Kristin,
Yes, you’re right, I should have said “It is about time someone hit the librarians, technology integrators, ed-tech conference talkers, and Classrooms for the Future coaches with a clue bat.”
My apologies.
Great point Tom, but until teacher training programs get on board and begin to deliver this information….I mean if you search copyright vs fair use ALL of the hit turn up guidelines like this:
http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/copyright/fairuse.html
It is no WONDER that is what folks are preaching.
I am GLAD that our CFF coaching program brought this bat out and allowed us the freedom to start swinging at our assumptions!
I am thinking about Dave’s comment. the crux of copyright is that when you create something, you get control. You can control the who-what-where-when-why for publishing, performing, distributing…everything. This is a misconception. There were situations shared that I thought for SURE would not be a fair use of materials but under the definition of transformativeness were able to be used even FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES. One example was where a book publisher sought permission to use a poster (initially intended to promote a concert) in a book where it would be used to demonstrate how culture was reflected through art of the 60’s. The book publisher sought permission, was denied, sued and WON based on the transformative use of this work. And this is not an excerpt from a single conference this is by
word of an attorney who specializes in copyright law. Yes Tom, it is about time….it is about time that we come out from under the grasp of the copyright office…who gets their meals from the TV, music, and movie industry and stand up for ourselves as educators…do I deserve to be hit with a clue bat for that 🙂