By Brad Templeton
1) "If it doesn't have a copyright notice, it's not copyrighted."
This was true in the past, but today almost all major nations follow the Berne copyright convention. For example, in the USA, almost everything created privately after April 1, 1989 is copyrighted and protected whether it has a notice or not. The default you should assume for other people's works is that they are copyrighted and may not be copied unless you *know* otherwise. There are some old works that lost protection without notice, but frankly you should not risk it unless you know for sure.
It is true that a notice strengthens the protection, by warning people, and by allowing one to get more and different damages, but it is not necessary. If it looks copyrighted, you should assume it is. This applies to pictures, too. You may not scan pictures from magazines and post them to the net, and if you come upon something unknown, you shouldn't post that either.
The correct form for a notice is: "Copyright by " You can use C in a circle instead of "Copyright" but "(C)" has never been given legal force. The phrase "All Rights Reserved" used to be required in some nations but is now not needed.
2) "If I don't charge for it, it's not a violation."
False. Whether you charge can affect the damages awarded in court, but that's essentially the only difference. It's still a violation if you give it away -- and there can still be heavy damages if you hurt the commercial value of the property.
3) "If it's posted to Usenet it's in the public domain."
False. Nothing is in the public domain anymore unless the owner explicitly puts it in the public domain(*). Explicitly, as in you have a note from the author/owner saying, "I grant this to the public domain." Those exact words or words very much like them.
Some argue that posting to Usenet implicitly grants permission to everybody to copy the posting within fairly wide bounds, and others feel that Usenet is an automatic store and forward network where all the thousands of copies made are done at the command (rather than the consent) of the poster. This is a matter of some debate, but even if the former is true (and in this writer's opinion we should all pray it isn't true) it simply would suggest posters are implicitly granting permissions "for the sort of copying one might expect when one posts to Usenet" and in no case is this a placement of material into the public domain. Furthermore it is very difficult for an implicit licence to supersede an explicitly stated licence that the copier was aware of.
Note that all this assumes the poster had the right to post the item in the first place. If the poster didn't, then all the copies are pirate, and no implied licence or theoretical reduction of the copyright can take place.
(*) Copyrights can expire after a long time, putting someting into the public domain, and there are some fine points on this issue regarder older copyright law versions. However, none of this applies to an original article posted to USENET.
Note that granting something to the public domain is a complete abandonment of all rights. You can't make something "PD for non-commercial use." If your work is PD, other people can even modify one byte and put their name on it.
4) "My posting was just fair use!"
See other notes on fair use for a detailed answer, but bear the following in mind:
The "fair use" exemption to copyright law was created to allow things such as commentary, parody, news reporting, research and education about copyrighted works without the permission of the author. Intent, and damage to the commercial value of the work are important considerations. Are you reproducing an article from the New York Times because you needed to in order to criticise the quality of the New York Times, or because you couldn't find time to write your own story, or didn't want your readers to have to pay to log onto the online services with the story or buy a copy of the paper? The former is probably fair use, the latter probably aren't.
Fair use is almost always a short excerpt and almost always attributed. (One should not use more of the work than is necessary to make the commentary.) It should not harm the commercial value of the work (which is another reason why reproduction of the entire work is generally forbidden.)
Note that most inclusion of text in Usenet followups is for commentary and reply, and it doesn't damage the commercial value of the original posting (if it has any) and as such it is fair use. Fair use isn't an exact doctrine, either. The court decides if the right to comment overrides the copyright on an indidvidual basis in each case. There have been cases that go beyond the bounds of what I say above, but in general they don't apply to the typical net misclaim of fair use. It's a risky defence to attempt.
5) "If you don't defend your copyright you lose it."
False. Copyright is effectively never lost these days, unless explicitly given away. You may be thinking of trade marks, which can be weakened or lost if not defended.
6) "Somebody has that name copyrighted!"
You can't "copyright a name," or anything short like that. Titles usually don't qualify -- but I doubt you may write a song entitled "Everybody's got something to hide except for me and my monkey." (J.Lennon/P.McCartney)
You can't copyright words, but you can trademark them, generally by using them to refer to your brand of a generic type of product or service. Like an "Apple" computer. Apple Computer "owns" that word applied to computers, even though it is also an ordinary word. Apple Records owns it when applied to music. Neither owns the word on its own, only in context, and owning a mark doesn't mean complete control -- see a more detailed treatise on this law for details.
You can't use somebody else's trademark in a way that would unfairly hurt the value of the mark, or in a way that might make people confuse you with the real owner of the mark, or which might allow you to profit from the mark's good name. For example, if I were giving advice on music videos, I would be very wary of trying to label my works with a name like "mtv." :-)
7) "They can't get me, defendants in court have powerful rights!"
Copyright law is mostly civil law. If you violate copyright you would usually get sued, not charged with a crime. "Innocent until proven guilty" is a principle of criminal law, as is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt." Sorry, but in copyright suits, these don't apply the same way or at all. It's mostly which side and set of evidence the judge or jury accepts or believes more, though the rules vary based on the type of infringement. In civil cases you can even be made to testify against your own interests.
8) "Oh, so copyright violation isn't a crime or anything?"
Actually, recently in the USA commercial copyright violation involving more than 10 copies and value over $2500 was made a felony. So watch out. (At least you get the protections of criminal law.) On the other hand, don't think you're going to get people thrown in jail for posting your E-mail. The courts have much better things to do than that. This is a fairly new, untested statute.
9) "It doesn't hurt anybody -- in fact it's free advertising."
It's up to the owner to decide if they want the free ads or not. If they want them, they will be sure to contact you. Don't rationalize whether it hurts the owner or not, *ask* them. Usually that's not too hard to do. Time past, ClariNet published the very funny Dave Barry column to a large and appreciative Usenet audience for a fee, but some person didn't ask, and forwarded it to a mailing list, got caught, and the newspaper chain that employs Dave Barry pulled the column from the net, pissing off everybody who enjoyed it. Even if you can't think of how the author or owner gets hurt, think about the fact that piracy on the net hurts everybody who wants a chance to use this wonderful new technology to do more than read other people's flamewars.
10) "They e-mailed me a copy, so I can post it."
To have a copy is not to have the copyright. All the E-mail you write is copyrighted. However, E-mail is not, unless previously agreed, secret. So you can certainly *report* on what E-mail you are sent, and reveal what it says. You can even quote parts of it to demonstrate. Frankly, somebody who sues over an ordinary message might well get no damages, because the message has no commercial value, but if you want to stay strictly in the law, you should ask first. On the other hand, don't go nuts if somebody posts your E-mail. If it was an ordinary non-secret personal letter of minimal commercial value with no copyright notice (like 99.9% of all E-mail), you probably won't get any damages if you sue them.
----------------- In Summary ---------------------------
These days, almost all things are copyrighted the moment they are written, and no copyright notice is required.
Copyright is still violated whether you charged money or not, only damages are affected by that.
Postings to the net are not granted to the public domain, and don't grant you any permission to do further copying except *perhaps* the sort of copying the poster might have expected in the ordinary flow of the net.
Fair use is a complex doctrine meant to allow certain valuable social purposes. Ask yourself why you are republishing what you are posting and why you couldn't have just rewritten it in your own words.
Copyright is not lost because you don't defend it; that's a concept from trademark law. The ownership of names is also from trademark law, so don't say somebody has a name copyrighted.
Copyright law is mostly civil law where the special rights of criminal defendants you hear so much about don't apply. Watch out, however, as new laws are moving copyright violation into the criminal realm.
Don't rationalize that you are helping the copyright holder; often it's not that hard to ask permission.
Posting E-mail is technically a violation, but revealing facts from E-mail isn't, and for almost all typical E-mail, nobody could wring any damages from you for posting it.
1) "If it doesn't have a copyright notice, it's not copyrighted."
This was true in the past, but today almost all major nations follow the Berne copyright convention. For example, in the USA, almost everything created privately after April 1, 1989 is copyrighted and protected whether it has a notice or not. The default you should assume for other people's works is that they are copyrighted and may not be copied unless you *know* otherwise. There are some old works that lost protection without notice, but frankly you should not risk it unless you know for sure.
It is true that a notice strengthens the protection, by warning people, and by allowing one to get more and different damages, but it is not necessary. If it looks copyrighted, you should assume it is. This applies to pictures, too. You may not scan pictures from magazines and post them to the net, and if you come upon something unknown, you shouldn't post that either.
The correct form for a notice is: "Copyright by " You can use C in a circle instead of "Copyright" but "(C)" has never been given legal force. The phrase "All Rights Reserved" used to be required in some nations but is now not needed.
2) "If I don't charge for it, it's not a violation."
False. Whether you charge can affect the damages awarded in court, but that's essentially the only difference. It's still a violation if you give it away -- and there can still be heavy damages if you hurt the commercial value of the property.
3) "If it's posted to Usenet it's in the public domain."
False. Nothing is in the public domain anymore unless the owner explicitly puts it in the public domain(*). Explicitly, as in you have a note from the author/owner saying, "I grant this to the public domain." Those exact words or words very much like them.
Some argue that posting to Usenet implicitly grants permission to everybody to copy the posting within fairly wide bounds, and others feel that Usenet is an automatic store and forward network where all the thousands of copies made are done at the command (rather than the consent) of the poster. This is a matter of some debate, but even if the former is true (and in this writer's opinion we should all pray it isn't true) it simply would suggest posters are implicitly granting permissions "for the sort of copying one might expect when one posts to Usenet" and in no case is this a placement of material into the public domain. Furthermore it is very difficult for an implicit licence to supersede an explicitly stated licence that the copier was aware of.
Note that all this assumes the poster had the right to post the item in the first place. If the poster didn't, then all the copies are pirate, and no implied licence or theoretical reduction of the copyright can take place.
(*) Copyrights can expire after a long time, putting someting into the public domain, and there are some fine points on this issue regarder older copyright law versions. However, none of this applies to an original article posted to USENET.
Note that granting something to the public domain is a complete abandonment of all rights. You can't make something "PD for non-commercial use." If your work is PD, other people can even modify one byte and put their name on it.
4) "My posting was just fair use!"
See other notes on fair use for a detailed answer, but bear the following in mind:
The "fair use" exemption to copyright law was created to allow things such as commentary, parody, news reporting, research and education about copyrighted works without the permission of the author. Intent, and damage to the commercial value of the work are important considerations. Are you reproducing an article from the New York Times because you needed to in order to criticise the quality of the New York Times, or because you couldn't find time to write your own story, or didn't want your readers to have to pay to log onto the online services with the story or buy a copy of the paper? The former is probably fair use, the latter probably aren't.
Fair use is almost always a short excerpt and almost always attributed. (One should not use more of the work than is necessary to make the commentary.) It should not harm the commercial value of the work (which is another reason why reproduction of the entire work is generally forbidden.)
Note that most inclusion of text in Usenet followups is for commentary and reply, and it doesn't damage the commercial value of the original posting (if it has any) and as such it is fair use. Fair use isn't an exact doctrine, either. The court decides if the right to comment overrides the copyright on an indidvidual basis in each case. There have been cases that go beyond the bounds of what I say above, but in general they don't apply to the typical net misclaim of fair use. It's a risky defence to attempt.
5) "If you don't defend your copyright you lose it."
False. Copyright is effectively never lost these days, unless explicitly given away. You may be thinking of trade marks, which can be weakened or lost if not defended.
6) "Somebody has that name copyrighted!"
You can't "copyright a name," or anything short like that. Titles usually don't qualify -- but I doubt you may write a song entitled "Everybody's got something to hide except for me and my monkey." (J.Lennon/P.McCartney)
You can't copyright words, but you can trademark them, generally by using them to refer to your brand of a generic type of product or service. Like an "Apple" computer. Apple Computer "owns" that word applied to computers, even though it is also an ordinary word. Apple Records owns it when applied to music. Neither owns the word on its own, only in context, and owning a mark doesn't mean complete control -- see a more detailed treatise on this law for details.
You can't use somebody else's trademark in a way that would unfairly hurt the value of the mark, or in a way that might make people confuse you with the real owner of the mark, or which might allow you to profit from the mark's good name. For example, if I were giving advice on music videos, I would be very wary of trying to label my works with a name like "mtv." :-)
7) "They can't get me, defendants in court have powerful rights!"
Copyright law is mostly civil law. If you violate copyright you would usually get sued, not charged with a crime. "Innocent until proven guilty" is a principle of criminal law, as is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt." Sorry, but in copyright suits, these don't apply the same way or at all. It's mostly which side and set of evidence the judge or jury accepts or believes more, though the rules vary based on the type of infringement. In civil cases you can even be made to testify against your own interests.
8) "Oh, so copyright violation isn't a crime or anything?"
Actually, recently in the USA commercial copyright violation involving more than 10 copies and value over $2500 was made a felony. So watch out. (At least you get the protections of criminal law.) On the other hand, don't think you're going to get people thrown in jail for posting your E-mail. The courts have much better things to do than that. This is a fairly new, untested statute.
9) "It doesn't hurt anybody -- in fact it's free advertising."
It's up to the owner to decide if they want the free ads or not. If they want them, they will be sure to contact you. Don't rationalize whether it hurts the owner or not, *ask* them. Usually that's not too hard to do. Time past, ClariNet published the very funny Dave Barry column to a large and appreciative Usenet audience for a fee, but some person didn't ask, and forwarded it to a mailing list, got caught, and the newspaper chain that employs Dave Barry pulled the column from the net, pissing off everybody who enjoyed it. Even if you can't think of how the author or owner gets hurt, think about the fact that piracy on the net hurts everybody who wants a chance to use this wonderful new technology to do more than read other people's flamewars.
10) "They e-mailed me a copy, so I can post it."
To have a copy is not to have the copyright. All the E-mail you write is copyrighted. However, E-mail is not, unless previously agreed, secret. So you can certainly *report* on what E-mail you are sent, and reveal what it says. You can even quote parts of it to demonstrate. Frankly, somebody who sues over an ordinary message might well get no damages, because the message has no commercial value, but if you want to stay strictly in the law, you should ask first. On the other hand, don't go nuts if somebody posts your E-mail. If it was an ordinary non-secret personal letter of minimal commercial value with no copyright notice (like 99.9% of all E-mail), you probably won't get any damages if you sue them.
----------------- In Summary ---------------------------
These days, almost all things are copyrighted the moment they are written, and no copyright notice is required.
Copyright is still violated whether you charged money or not, only damages are affected by that.
Postings to the net are not granted to the public domain, and don't grant you any permission to do further copying except *perhaps* the sort of copying the poster might have expected in the ordinary flow of the net.
Fair use is a complex doctrine meant to allow certain valuable social purposes. Ask yourself why you are republishing what you are posting and why you couldn't have just rewritten it in your own words.
Copyright is not lost because you don't defend it; that's a concept from trademark law. The ownership of names is also from trademark law, so don't say somebody has a name copyrighted.
Copyright law is mostly civil law where the special rights of criminal defendants you hear so much about don't apply. Watch out, however, as new laws are moving copyright violation into the criminal realm.
Don't rationalize that you are helping the copyright holder; often it's not that hard to ask permission.
Posting E-mail is technically a violation, but revealing facts from E-mail isn't, and for almost all typical E-mail, nobody could wring any damages from you for posting it.
No formalities - including no registration
The Copyright Act does not require the completion of formalities (such as publication, registration or the payment of fees) in order to obtain protection in Australia, or any other country which is also a party to an international copyright treaty. This is unlike the position with patents, trade marks, designs and plant breeder's rights where registration is a precondition to protection. Copyright protection is granted automatically from the time an original work is created.
Copyright notice
Although copyright protection in Australia is not dependent upon formal notice, it is best practice and advisable for copyright owners to place a copyright notice in a prominent place on their work. There is no set form of words for a copyright notice, but such a notice may state:
This work is copyright. Apart from any use permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process, nor may any other exclusive right be exercised, without the permission of (name and address of copyright owner and the year in which the work was made).
It is sensible for copyright owners to regard their copyright as an item of property and to deal with it in a business-like way. Copyright owners should always keep dated copies of their works (eg manuscripts and tapes) and copies of any letters submitting their work to others. No document dealing with copyright should be signed unless its contents are fully understood.
Copyright owners of material in electronic form may also wish to attach electronic rights management information to their work or other subject-matter. The removal or alteration of this material is prohibited by the Copyright Act in certain circumstances. Copyright owners of material in electronic form can also protect their material by technologies such as password protection or software locks. The Copyright Act also prohibits the circumvention of locks which control access and dealings in devices and services used to circumvent locks.
The Copyright Act does not require the completion of formalities (such as publication, registration or the payment of fees) in order to obtain protection in Australia, or any other country which is also a party to an international copyright treaty. This is unlike the position with patents, trade marks, designs and plant breeder's rights where registration is a precondition to protection. Copyright protection is granted automatically from the time an original work is created.
Copyright notice
Although copyright protection in Australia is not dependent upon formal notice, it is best practice and advisable for copyright owners to place a copyright notice in a prominent place on their work. There is no set form of words for a copyright notice, but such a notice may state:
This work is copyright. Apart from any use permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process, nor may any other exclusive right be exercised, without the permission of (name and address of copyright owner and the year in which the work was made).
It is sensible for copyright owners to regard their copyright as an item of property and to deal with it in a business-like way. Copyright owners should always keep dated copies of their works (eg manuscripts and tapes) and copies of any letters submitting their work to others. No document dealing with copyright should be signed unless its contents are fully understood.
Copyright owners of material in electronic form may also wish to attach electronic rights management information to their work or other subject-matter. The removal or alteration of this material is prohibited by the Copyright Act in certain circumstances. Copyright owners of material in electronic form can also protect their material by technologies such as password protection or software locks. The Copyright Act also prohibits the circumvention of locks which control access and dealings in devices and services used to circumvent locks.
Whatever you call it, the theft of copyrighted material is just about impossible to control in our ever-expanding, ever-increasing digital age. In fact, there is a widely held belief that technology has made copyright impossible to enforce.
Take the entertainment industry, for example:
While all school children are taught the dangers of plagiarism of print materials when they write their first term papers, many of these same kids are some of the greatest offenders who believe that internet file sharing of their favorite music is their due simply for being fans of this or that rock or rap group.
The music industry, of course, has been vigorously fighting back with numerous lawsuits, many of which target these same young people. And, while some progress seems to have been made, the reality is that the problem is so massive, it is all but rendering music artists’ copyrights useless. While it may be possible to bring some control to the internet, with just a bit of internet savvy and searching, you can find and download programs which can be used to “unlock” the various security features built in to all music and video CDs. With that kind of tool, it’s possible to pirate this type of intellectual property without leaving a trail on the internet.
Like musicians, photographers are finding that anyone with minimal skill and the right software can alter the original image and use it on websites, narrowcasts and the like. In an interesting twist, a Florida photo printing lab refused to print an amateur photographer’s digital photos because they looked too professional, and the lab managers feared that doing so might violate someone’s copyright. On the more unsavory side, phone cameras are now being used to clandestinely copy and use everything from drivers’ licenses to copyrighted artwork.
Writers are equally concerned. For example, Google recently announced its intention to put the libraries of four major universities on line to make previously inaccessible material available to researchers. The outcry of the publishing industry, professional associations and even a country (France) was immediate, strong and negative. While copyright for many of the works has expired, critics say the effort could have financially troubling outcomes.
So, is copyright truly “dead” – a meaningless exercise in the digital age? Is the creator of intellectual property to assume that their right to profit from his or her creative product is lost?
While clear solutions are yet to emerge, the important thing to know is that digital gurus as well as legislators in several countries are developing technology and updating laws to assure that all types of works remain protected. You also would be well advised to pay close attention to how this issue continues to unfold and develop. Do your own internet searching to find and bookmark blogs, discussion groups and websites serving as copyright “watchdogs”. Then visit often and pass along what you learn to your own professional groups and colleagues. One final caveat: Be sure to consult your IP attorney with any concerns and questions.
© 2005-2006. All rights reserved. Impact Coaching International™.
Copyright and bio paragraph must be included when reproducing this article.
Rosemary Hauschild is an innovation and creativity business coach serving individuals developing intellectual property. Impact Coaching International™ offers a year-long program showing creative individuals how to protect, promote and profit from their innovative ideas in less time and with more profits. Individual coaching services are also available. To learn more about how to protect and promote your intellectual property, you are invited to subscribe to the free e-zine, Creations Of The Mind™, by sending an email to subscribe@impactcoaching.biz with the following phrase in the subject line of your e-mail: subscribe creations list. To contact Rosemary directly, please email
Take the entertainment industry, for example:
While all school children are taught the dangers of plagiarism of print materials when they write their first term papers, many of these same kids are some of the greatest offenders who believe that internet file sharing of their favorite music is their due simply for being fans of this or that rock or rap group.
The music industry, of course, has been vigorously fighting back with numerous lawsuits, many of which target these same young people. And, while some progress seems to have been made, the reality is that the problem is so massive, it is all but rendering music artists’ copyrights useless. While it may be possible to bring some control to the internet, with just a bit of internet savvy and searching, you can find and download programs which can be used to “unlock” the various security features built in to all music and video CDs. With that kind of tool, it’s possible to pirate this type of intellectual property without leaving a trail on the internet.
Like musicians, photographers are finding that anyone with minimal skill and the right software can alter the original image and use it on websites, narrowcasts and the like. In an interesting twist, a Florida photo printing lab refused to print an amateur photographer’s digital photos because they looked too professional, and the lab managers feared that doing so might violate someone’s copyright. On the more unsavory side, phone cameras are now being used to clandestinely copy and use everything from drivers’ licenses to copyrighted artwork.
Writers are equally concerned. For example, Google recently announced its intention to put the libraries of four major universities on line to make previously inaccessible material available to researchers. The outcry of the publishing industry, professional associations and even a country (France) was immediate, strong and negative. While copyright for many of the works has expired, critics say the effort could have financially troubling outcomes.
So, is copyright truly “dead” – a meaningless exercise in the digital age? Is the creator of intellectual property to assume that their right to profit from his or her creative product is lost?
While clear solutions are yet to emerge, the important thing to know is that digital gurus as well as legislators in several countries are developing technology and updating laws to assure that all types of works remain protected. You also would be well advised to pay close attention to how this issue continues to unfold and develop. Do your own internet searching to find and bookmark blogs, discussion groups and websites serving as copyright “watchdogs”. Then visit often and pass along what you learn to your own professional groups and colleagues. One final caveat: Be sure to consult your IP attorney with any concerns and questions.
© 2005-2006. All rights reserved. Impact Coaching International™.
Copyright and bio paragraph must be included when reproducing this article.
Rosemary Hauschild is an innovation and creativity business coach serving individuals developing intellectual property. Impact Coaching International™ offers a year-long program showing creative individuals how to protect, promote and profit from their innovative ideas in less time and with more profits. Individual coaching services are also available. To learn more about how to protect and promote your intellectual property, you are invited to subscribe to the free e-zine, Creations Of The Mind™, by sending an email to subscribe@impactcoaching.biz with the following phrase in the subject line of your e-mail: subscribe creations list. To contact Rosemary directly, please email
Information technology has improved by leaps and bounds over the years providing people across the globe with multiple options to manage and handle their information and data online. However like any other field the Web is also prone to theft and burglary, called hacking in the IT terminology. It is therefore extremely necessary for you to find out some method of document security
online to protect your valuable data and information.
Digital Rights Management (DRM) - an overview
Broadly speaking digital rights management or DRM as it is known as the tool through which as publisher or author of the work will control the rights of the purchaser on set terms and conditions. In fact it is one of the best methods for ensuring regulatory compliance. Rights exercised by the purchaser are effectively controlled under the system.
Traditionally the author of books and publications in the print industry used to regulate the rights of the purchaser using the Copy Rights Act or similar other legal methods. With the digitization of most of the works and publications to day, the focus has moved on to the digitalized control of the user’s rights. The exercise of rights has become more specific and easier with the digital system in place than through the copyrights in the print media.
Change of balance of power
During the last decade there has been a marked change of balance of power throughout the world. In the present day even the web content security has become a major problem which is required to be addressed affectively. In the past you had to find out a publisher to print a copied document. The possibility was remote since the publisher knew pretty well that he would be sued immediately under the copyrights Act. The print industry was physical and there were physical controls available.
The scenario has undergone a complete transformation with the introduction of the digital documents replacing the old time print documents. You can now copy documents on your PC at no cost and there is hardly any possibility of detection. Video and music piracy, stolen documents have become so common that without Digital Rights Management or DRM it may not be possible to protect web contents. File sharing and unlimited transmission facilities on the nets have further compounded the problem.
DRM – A critical feature
Thus Digital right management has become a critical issue in the world of Information Technology to day. So people are now tending to ensure web content security with copy protection software. Especially when you are building up your confidential database or transmitting some important information that you do not wish to be public, the DRM assumes a great significance.
It may be some contact information, legal contracts, analyst’s report, newsletter, or publications, both ordinary and pdf protection is highly essential for you. You have to prevent stealing, burglary and hacking and there is no alternative to digital rights management for you for accomplishment of such critical tasks. Your intellectual property requires protection and DRM provides you just the required capability to protect them.
online to protect your valuable data and information.
Digital Rights Management (DRM) - an overview
Broadly speaking digital rights management or DRM as it is known as the tool through which as publisher or author of the work will control the rights of the purchaser on set terms and conditions. In fact it is one of the best methods for ensuring regulatory compliance. Rights exercised by the purchaser are effectively controlled under the system.
Traditionally the author of books and publications in the print industry used to regulate the rights of the purchaser using the Copy Rights Act or similar other legal methods. With the digitization of most of the works and publications to day, the focus has moved on to the digitalized control of the user’s rights. The exercise of rights has become more specific and easier with the digital system in place than through the copyrights in the print media.
Change of balance of power
During the last decade there has been a marked change of balance of power throughout the world. In the present day even the web content security has become a major problem which is required to be addressed affectively. In the past you had to find out a publisher to print a copied document. The possibility was remote since the publisher knew pretty well that he would be sued immediately under the copyrights Act. The print industry was physical and there were physical controls available.
The scenario has undergone a complete transformation with the introduction of the digital documents replacing the old time print documents. You can now copy documents on your PC at no cost and there is hardly any possibility of detection. Video and music piracy, stolen documents have become so common that without Digital Rights Management or DRM it may not be possible to protect web contents. File sharing and unlimited transmission facilities on the nets have further compounded the problem.
DRM – A critical feature
Thus Digital right management has become a critical issue in the world of Information Technology to day. So people are now tending to ensure web content security with copy protection software. Especially when you are building up your confidential database or transmitting some important information that you do not wish to be public, the DRM assumes a great significance.
It may be some contact information, legal contracts, analyst’s report, newsletter, or publications, both ordinary and pdf protection is highly essential for you. You have to prevent stealing, burglary and hacking and there is no alternative to digital rights management for you for accomplishment of such critical tasks. Your intellectual property requires protection and DRM provides you just the required capability to protect them.
I know a lot of you HATE to act like salespeople or HATE to push your product or service, but if you don't do it and you don't have a sales team - WHO WILL DO IT??
That's why I recommend you learn the most effective ways to write a sales letter or email. This way at least you'll have effective copy working for you.
So, what is a sales letter? What do I mean? Its that long, scrolling page that you see on many websites these days that you sometimes don't even know what they're selling until you get to the bottom and you especially don't know how much it is until you reach the bottom but you'll soon find out that you've been 'hooked' when you're halfway down the page and 5 minutes have gone by.
Not a lot of people you see really do this well. After all, don't many small business owners complain that they're marketing isn't working well if at all?
This is mostly due to the copy or content in such a marketing piece. I don't care if we're talking about an ad, postcard, flyer, door-hanger, webpage, email, printed newsletter or brochure. The content is what makes or breaks it; it's what sells or doesn't sell.
Of course you have to place your ad or promotion in the right place, targeting the right people but using the 'right message' is critical.
I coach small business owners and entrepreneurs on a daily basis about these strategies when I work with them on creating their marketing materials, websites or email newsletters. Coming up with creative, fresh marketing ideas and solutions to bring entrepreneurs more business without breaking the bank is what I specialize in!
This is a great checklist for you to use when you're creating your own sales copy or promotional materials no matter what the industry, product or service.
1. It's important to do your market research and know your target market.
2. Draw them in with a killer BIG AND BOLD headline.
3. Use engaging subheadings, phrases and statistics.
4. Be reader-centered, not writer-centered.
5. Be conversational.
6. Ask for the order!
7. Offer bonuses & a guarantee.
8. Include a P.S.
9. Have your copy proofread!
Now, if you still feel like you can't get it down or write it in a way your readers will respond easily, then you can delegate this. Find a Marketing Specialist and they will copyright any marketing materials or websites you have.
That's why I recommend you learn the most effective ways to write a sales letter or email. This way at least you'll have effective copy working for you.
So, what is a sales letter? What do I mean? Its that long, scrolling page that you see on many websites these days that you sometimes don't even know what they're selling until you get to the bottom and you especially don't know how much it is until you reach the bottom but you'll soon find out that you've been 'hooked' when you're halfway down the page and 5 minutes have gone by.
Not a lot of people you see really do this well. After all, don't many small business owners complain that they're marketing isn't working well if at all?
This is mostly due to the copy or content in such a marketing piece. I don't care if we're talking about an ad, postcard, flyer, door-hanger, webpage, email, printed newsletter or brochure. The content is what makes or breaks it; it's what sells or doesn't sell.
Of course you have to place your ad or promotion in the right place, targeting the right people but using the 'right message' is critical.
I coach small business owners and entrepreneurs on a daily basis about these strategies when I work with them on creating their marketing materials, websites or email newsletters. Coming up with creative, fresh marketing ideas and solutions to bring entrepreneurs more business without breaking the bank is what I specialize in!
This is a great checklist for you to use when you're creating your own sales copy or promotional materials no matter what the industry, product or service.
1. It's important to do your market research and know your target market.
2. Draw them in with a killer BIG AND BOLD headline.
3. Use engaging subheadings, phrases and statistics.
4. Be reader-centered, not writer-centered.
5. Be conversational.
6. Ask for the order!
7. Offer bonuses & a guarantee.
8. Include a P.S.
9. Have your copy proofread!
Now, if you still feel like you can't get it down or write it in a way your readers will respond easily, then you can delegate this. Find a Marketing Specialist and they will copyright any marketing materials or websites you have.
The notice however is still relevant as it lets the public know that the work has a copyright and gives the name of the author as with the date when it was first published. In the case of a lawsuit, the party owning the work is always better protected if there is a written notice. Providing a notice does not require the permission of the copyright office.
• Copies you can see: This form of notice should have 3 elements to it. The symbol of copyright which is a c with a circle around it. The first year the work was published. Greeting cards and stationary etc do not require a date. The author's identifying initials or name.
• For Sound records and Phonorecord: For this one you use a p with a circle around it. The first year it was made and the name of the person who wrote the piece. If there is a producer and the name appears on the box, then the name will appear in the copyright as producer.
• The Position of the Notice: The positioning of the notice is important. It has to be prominently displayed so everyone can make out what it is. All the required three elements of the notice shall appear together.
• US Government Works: The US government as such does not get US copyright protection. However an exception exists. Where it applies the notice should be placed stating it is the US government copyright and the regular wording.
• Unpublished work: When an unpublished work leaves the presence and control of the author, they may like to put a notice identifying the copyright if taken.
• Copies you can see: This form of notice should have 3 elements to it. The symbol of copyright which is a c with a circle around it. The first year the work was published. Greeting cards and stationary etc do not require a date. The author's identifying initials or name.
• For Sound records and Phonorecord: For this one you use a p with a circle around it. The first year it was made and the name of the person who wrote the piece. If there is a producer and the name appears on the box, then the name will appear in the copyright as producer.
• The Position of the Notice: The positioning of the notice is important. It has to be prominently displayed so everyone can make out what it is. All the required three elements of the notice shall appear together.
• US Government Works: The US government as such does not get US copyright protection. However an exception exists. Where it applies the notice should be placed stating it is the US government copyright and the regular wording.
• Unpublished work: When an unpublished work leaves the presence and control of the author, they may like to put a notice identifying the copyright if taken.
Copyright infringement, also known as copyright violation, is a serious crime in the United States. It occurs when someone violates copyright laws that protect an individual's intellectual or creative property.
The popular conception--or, more accurately, misconception--that copyright infringement involves piracy of only movies or music is false. Copyrights for various things can be violated. For example, the copyright of a book can be violated if someone photocopies an entire book and sells the photocopied book. Similarly, even toys' copyrights can be violated. How? If someone designs a toy so that it looks exactly like a toy made by some other company or individual and then markets or sells that toy as if it were made by that other individual or company, then that too is copyright infringement.
Like the act itself, the penalties for copyright infringement are wide-ranging and various. Copyright violators can be prosecuted by public officials because they violated the law. Most copyright infringement cases, however, are pursued through private lawsuits in which the party negatively affected by the copyright violation, say the record company of a CD being pirated by an individual, sues that individual for heavy monetary damages as well restrictions on future usage rights. For example, when college students are found to be conducting practices that violate copyright law by downloading music, the record label(s) will send a letter asking the student to stop and to pay a fine of an amount of $3000 or so. If the students refuses either, then the label(s) will pursue litigation and the cost to settle the case will jump to $100,000 or so.
There a number of reasons people use to justify their copyright violation. Some are as follows:
* People only download stuff that they otherwise would not buy, so a company's profits are not affected.
* Downloading material allows people to "taste" something before they buy it. If they like it, they buy it; if they don't like it, they don't buy it and supposedly delete the downloaded item.
* Downloading something allows people to boycott a product or person whom they disagree with.
These are only some of the argument made by people who violate copyright law. People or businesses whose copyrights are violated, however, will not agree with any copyright laws. And more importantly, none of these arguments will hold up in a court of law.
The popular conception--or, more accurately, misconception--that copyright infringement involves piracy of only movies or music is false. Copyrights for various things can be violated. For example, the copyright of a book can be violated if someone photocopies an entire book and sells the photocopied book. Similarly, even toys' copyrights can be violated. How? If someone designs a toy so that it looks exactly like a toy made by some other company or individual and then markets or sells that toy as if it were made by that other individual or company, then that too is copyright infringement.
Like the act itself, the penalties for copyright infringement are wide-ranging and various. Copyright violators can be prosecuted by public officials because they violated the law. Most copyright infringement cases, however, are pursued through private lawsuits in which the party negatively affected by the copyright violation, say the record company of a CD being pirated by an individual, sues that individual for heavy monetary damages as well restrictions on future usage rights. For example, when college students are found to be conducting practices that violate copyright law by downloading music, the record label(s) will send a letter asking the student to stop and to pay a fine of an amount of $3000 or so. If the students refuses either, then the label(s) will pursue litigation and the cost to settle the case will jump to $100,000 or so.
There a number of reasons people use to justify their copyright violation. Some are as follows:
* People only download stuff that they otherwise would not buy, so a company's profits are not affected.
* Downloading material allows people to "taste" something before they buy it. If they like it, they buy it; if they don't like it, they don't buy it and supposedly delete the downloaded item.
* Downloading something allows people to boycott a product or person whom they disagree with.
These are only some of the argument made by people who violate copyright law. People or businesses whose copyrights are violated, however, will not agree with any copyright laws. And more importantly, none of these arguments will hold up in a court of law.
Copywriting marketing is more important than writing copy to sell to business owners.
Take a look at the following tips to close your ad copy:
You could end your ad copy with a question they will always say yes too. They then will be used to saying yes when you ask them to order.
You could end your ad copy with a short review of your whole ad. Repeat all the major benefits and features they will receive.
You could end your ad copy by telling people what will happen if they buy your product. Use your most powerful benefit as the example.
You could end your ad copy with a deadline. Tell them it's a limited time offer and they need to order by a specific date.
You could end your ad copy by telling people what will happen if they don't buy your product. Use a problem that they won't be able to solve without it.
You could end your ad copy with a powerful guarantee. Give them a lifetime or triple your money back guarantee.
You could end your ad copy with a free bonus. When you give them a free bonus it increases the product's perceived value.
You could end your ad copy with a testimonial. Use one or two of your customers' testimonials that is believable and includes specific results.
You could end your ad copy with a discounted price. Just list your regular price and then offer a discounted price off the order right now.
Very well. Niche marketing is more important than writing copy to sell to business owners, this is a very important concept.
Do not forget it.
Take a look at the following tips to close your ad copy:
You could end your ad copy with a question they will always say yes too. They then will be used to saying yes when you ask them to order.
You could end your ad copy with a short review of your whole ad. Repeat all the major benefits and features they will receive.
You could end your ad copy by telling people what will happen if they buy your product. Use your most powerful benefit as the example.
You could end your ad copy with a deadline. Tell them it's a limited time offer and they need to order by a specific date.
You could end your ad copy by telling people what will happen if they don't buy your product. Use a problem that they won't be able to solve without it.
You could end your ad copy with a powerful guarantee. Give them a lifetime or triple your money back guarantee.
You could end your ad copy with a free bonus. When you give them a free bonus it increases the product's perceived value.
You could end your ad copy with a testimonial. Use one or two of your customers' testimonials that is believable and includes specific results.
You could end your ad copy with a discounted price. Just list your regular price and then offer a discounted price off the order right now.
Very well. Niche marketing is more important than writing copy to sell to business owners, this is a very important concept.
Do not forget it.
Understand that the hardest part of copywriting, or any kind of writing, is the opening line. If you do not lead into your sales message with the correct story, it will not get read, no matter how catchy the attention headline or the rest of the page is. What makes the process even more daunting is that it is so hard to write on an empty page. That is why I always keep three phrases in mind when writing good openers: questions, connect the dots, and connecting to current events.
The easiest way to write a good opener is to ask a question. Are you about to send an e-mail about dog training? Then start a story like: "You know what I hate the most about dog training?" Then proceed to answer your own question. This has the double benefit that, not only is it super easy to write a document as an answer to a question, your readers will naturally be curious for the answer. Instead of simply giving them the solution to this dog training problem, you are telling them that the answer is coming up.
Next, there is the "connect the dots" strategy. Think of three random objects to include in your story... like prunes, an empty can of soup, and tennis balls. Tell your readers, "Continue reading to find out what a handful of prunes, an empty can of soup, and tennis balls have to do with dog training." Inserting random keywords into your story will boost your brain's creativity into overdrive.
You might scramble to weave together a story about how you were out jogging with your dog one early morning, he was chasing after a tennis ball and you stumbled over a can of soup to fall into a pile of prunes. The entire time, your dog sat there loyally waiting for you to get up... as if he were a real companion. Okay, that example is kind of cheesy, but you get the idea.
Finally, another good starting point is connecting your story openers to current events. What's going in the world overseas? Stay away from politics but I have seen countless e-mails in the last few years that begin with, "Recession? We don't need no stinkin' recession..."
Remember to ask questions, connect the dots, or keep in touch with current events, and you will always craft excellent copywriting story openers.
When creating an ad copy, you should make it believable and persuasive. Some of us are missing some crucial things to include. Here are 7 tips to help you create a powerful ad copy.
1. Use a "P.S." at the end of your ad copy. This is where you either want to repeat a strong benefit or use a strong close, like a free bonus. For example, "P.S. You can get (product), worth over ($), for the low price of ($)!" Another example, "P.S. I can not guarantee the (No.) bonuses will be here tomorrow!"
2. You could end your ad copy with a discounted price. Just list your regular price and then offer a discounted price off the order 'right now'. You could also offer a rebate that takes effect instantly. For example, you could say, "Instead of paying $99, you could order now and get an instant rebate of $20 - you only pay $79!"
3. You could end your ad copy with a free sample or trial of your product. If your ad didn't attract them to buy, maybe a free sample or trial would. If you were selling an e-book, you could give them a free sample at the end of your ad copy. For example, you could say, "If you're still not sure about ordering, download a FREE sample chapter!"
4. Motivate people to buy your product. Tell them positive things. For example, you could say, "You can now reach your goals and change your life if you buy our product." If you come across positive in your ad copy, they will become positive about reaching their goals using your product.
5. Never assume people believe the information in your ad copy. You need to back-up all your claims with indisputable evidence. For example, you could include testimonials, expert endorsements, third party tests or studies, strong guarantees, a list of customers, pictures of customers, etc.
6. Create a bond with your visitors by bringing up likes or dislikes you have in common with them in your ad copy. Just make sure you do your research. For example, you could say, "I hate it when you have to wait in line for a long time at the drive-through." Another example, "I really like it when I have extra money to spend."
7. Ask people at the end of your copy why they decided not to buy. This will give you new ideas on how to produce ad copy that's more profitable. Have a web form or e-mail link in place so they can answer you. You may find out they don't like your guarantee or graphics. It could be anything.
Use these 7 tips and you'll create your own powerful ad copy.
Generally Speaking
Copyright rules and the University of Hawaii policy relating to copyright and duplication seem to be antithetical to a primary goal of education -- access to information. It is easy to be incensed at limitations for photocopying of copyrighted documents and materials. But for another viewpoint, ask some of your colleagues who have published whether they would prefer that you copy an original or buy their book (and allow them to earn their royalty).
The intent of copyright is to assure the authors of creative and other published works an incentive to produce something that won't be stolen -- the right to the fruits of their labor. We chafe when copyright interferes with the easy delivery (because it is an unauthorized duplication of an original work) of information to our students.
For the UH system, the final authority (leaving the courts out of this, and providing this guide is an attempt to keep us all out of court) should be the April, 1992 UH Copyright Guidelines, which is 63 pages of explanation and examples of the application of copyright rules.
WHAT IS COPYRIGHTED?
The scope of the law is broad. It generally protects any expression recorded in any tangible form, published or unpublished, in any medium, with some exceptions noted below. The protection is automatic. A copyright notice is not necessary, but its presence is an emphatic assurance that the author intends the work to be fully protected. Unpublished works are copyrighted as well, regardless of the date of their creation.
WHAT IS NOT COPYRIGHTED?
* Federal publications, but not necessarily publications of State, Local, or Foreign Governments. If Federal publications contain "derived" material from some of these other publications, then you may not have the right to use them.
* Works published before 1/1/78 without a copyright notice. Between 1/1/78 and 3/1/89 a work without a copyright notice may be public domain, but very specific conditions apply, so see the April 1992 UH Copyright Guidelines to be sure. After 3/1/89, consider anything to be copyrighted, even if no notice is present.
* Works with an expired copyright, generally 75 years after publication or 100 years after creation may be used, unless the copyright was renewed. 75 years after the last date of publication seems to be a good guideline.
* Facts and ideas are not copyrighted, but for certain works paraphrasing, using the same plot, sequence, organization, structure, arrangement or style as a preexisting work is prohibited, whether this be a literary work, film or algorithm.
USING COPYRIGHTED WORKS
With specific exceptions, which we'll get to later, only the copyright owner may do or authorize the following:
* Reproduce the work in any form or medium
* Prepare a work that is based on or derived from the original work in any form or medium.
* Distribute copies of the work by sale, gift, rental, lease or lending.
* Performing the work, live or by other medium.
* Displaying a work, either directly or by telecommunications.
If you don't own the copyright, ask yourself:
1. Is the work in the public domain?
2. Do I have the owner's permission to use it?
3. Does a legal exception apply to my proposed use?
4. Does "fair use" apply here?
If you can't say "yes" to one of these but go ahead and use the material anyway, you are violating the copyright laws. You might say, "I'll take the risk, they'll never go after me," but doing so puts the College and others employed by the College at risk. And given the legal climate these days, the risk is significant. There is a simple solution: follow the "fair use" doctrine and get permission for use of copyrighted materials.
PUBLIC DOMAIN
If the work says that it is in the public domain, then it is. A published work with a date earlier than 75 years ago is probably public domain, and in fact, some companies make a good living by republishing such works and copyrighting them in their new format.
Permission
This is a grand thing to have, and since the copyright laws have become more stringent, publishers are set up to give permission for educational use, in many cases, with a minimum of fuss, sometimes by phone using an 800 number. Writing or calling for permission certainly shows good intent after using material under the fair use doctrine, and it is the way to go if subsequent use of the material is planned. Quite often, technical publications may be used with an acknowledgement because the manufacturer who provides the material wants technicians as well educated about their products. This does vary with the manufacturer and should be checked before use.
WHAT YOUR REQUEST FOR PERMISSION SHOULD CONTAIN
1. Title, author(s), or editor(s), edition number(s)
2. Exact amount of material used, preferably including a photocopy of the material involved in the request
3. Number of copies to be made
4. Description of how the material is to be used, for what course, and the frequency of use if for more than one occasion
5. Process of duplication (photocopy, off-set, litho, ditto, etc.)
The UH Copyright Guidelines have several examples of Permission Letters for both classroom use and for republishing copyrighted materials.
LEGAL (STATUTORY) EXCEPTIONS
The owners of an authorized copy of a copyrighted work can do just about anything they want with it except for making more copies, preparing derivative works, performing any work publicly or displaying the work by telecommunication. If the work is software or a sound recording it cannot be rented for profit.
A university is covered for some activities. Libraries and archives can duplicate works for preservation, security or copy replacement and make limited copies for their library users.
Fair Use
This is the key to whether or not the use you propose for a work is legal. Although the language of the Copy Right Law (Section 107) refers to education twice, educational use of copyrighted material is not automatically fair. Educational use is only "fair use" if justified, after examination of all the facts and circumstances, in light of the four factors as specified below and the other four significant factors. A nonprofit, educational purpose addresses only the first of the four factors: the "purpose and character of use."
Of the four factors, the "market effect" is the most important. The Constitution demands economic incentives, and any unauthorized use that adversely impacts the market for the original work directly undermines the economic incentive the Constitution requires. Thus, if any use of copyrighted materials that you propose is likely to substitute for purchase, subscription, or license of the original material and thereby deprive the copyright owner of revenue, that use is likely to be unfair.
The following are simplified explanations of common examples of fair use. Check the UH Copyright Guidelines for details or if you have questions.
STANDARDS FOR DETERMINING FAIR USE
The Fair Use Provision of the Copyrights Act of 1976 is found in Section 107 United States Code 17, and is intended to balance the interests of copyright owners with the needs of others who need access to copyrighted material. There are four general factors to be considered when evaluating whether material can be considered to be "Fair Use", and four "other factors" which have been the subject of court cases:
FOUR MAIN FACTORS
1. PURPOSE AND CHARACTER OF THE USE
Is the use for nonprofit, educational, or commercial use? Be aware that several courts have held that absence of financial gain is insufficient for a finding of fair use.
2. NATURE OF THE COPYRIGHTED WORK
Is the work creative or informational? Special consideration is given to the distinction between the two. Duplication of materials originally developed for classroom use (creative) is less likely to be fair use than the duplication of materials prepared for public consumption.
If you copy a workbook page or a chapter from a textbook you are more directly depriving the copyright holder of profits more directly than if you are copying a page from the newspaper.
3. AMOUNT, SUBSTANTIALITY, OR PORTION TO BE USED IN RELATION TO THE COPYRIGHTED WORK AS A WHOLE
What is the amount and significance of the portion copied?
4. EFFECT OF USE ON THE POTENTIAL MARKET
Probably the most important of the standards. If the copying of the copyrighted material reduces the potential market and therefore the potential sales and profit, that use is unlikely to be found a fair use.
OTHER STATUTORY FACTORS
The fair use doctrine is the first statutory version of a judicial doctrine dating back more than 100 years. Prior to 1976, fair use was a flexible common law doctrine. There is nothing in the present Fair Use doctrine that would prohibit reliance on these approaches in the future.
1. FUNCTIONAL USE TEST or substitute effect test:
To the extent that a copied work is used to substitute of a purchased copy, it is more likely to diminish the copyright owner's profits. The more you copy the more you harm, however, to the extent that you use the material in a different way than that which it was originally intended for, the likelihood that this would be considered fair use is increased.
2. PRODUCTIVE USE TEST:
The term "productive" is used two different ways: 1) Use of a copyrighted work that creates a new work, 2) Use that produces some ultimate benefit to society. A productive use must be contrasted with a convenient use; mere convenience has never been consider adequate rationale for fair use.
3. PUBLIC INTEREST FACTOR:
Is a legitimate public interest served by the use or distribution of this copyrighted work? Do the copyrighted materials "need" to be used in providing public interest with the "fullest information available"?
4. AVAILABILITY TEST:
Is the work readily available for purchase or through normal channels? If it is not, the work is more likely to be considered as a fair use.
Copying
COPYING FOR INDIVIDUAL USE
Making a single copy of written material for use by an individual student or instructor without further dissemination is permissible within limits. The copy can be circulated or displayed in a classroom if returned. The general limits are single chapters of a book, a short story, essay or poem, a graphic or picture, or an article from a periodical, journal or newspaper. If you wish to copy more than that, a reasonable effort to contact the author, publisher or copyright owner needs to be made to ensure that the work is not available through commercial sources at a fair price. Document your efforts and if you can't obtain what you need commercially, you may copy only what you need for use. If you do find a commercial source, then you can copy the original material that you have access to, as long as you destroy it when your original arrives. Repeated duplication from a periodical implies that you should subscribe.
COPYING FOR DISTRIBUTION TO STUDENTS
Since you would be making a number of copies instead of one, the potential for loss by a copyright holder is much greater, and the rules for this use are more strict. We all see material which would benefit our students, but in order for the use to be fair there are four requirements to meet: brevity, spontaneity, cumulative effect, and terms of copying.
Brevity means 250 words for a poem, 2,500 words for a complete prose article or 1000 words from a longer work, one illustration per book or periodical.
Spontaneity means there isn't reasonable time to get permission before using the item for maximum educational effect. This means you can use it once. If you wish to use it again you would presumably have time to gain permission.
Cumulative effect means that you use it for one course, or use one short poem, article, story or essay and no more than two excerpts per author per term, or no more than three excerpts from a collective work or periodical (other than current newspapers), or no more than nine instances of multiple copying per course per term.
The terms of copying to satisfy are no more than one copy per student, no profit if copying costs are charged to the student, a copyright notice from the original must be included in each copy, the copies may not be used to create or replace anthologies, compilations or collective works whether the copies are made in batches or separately. Consumables such as workbooks, standardized tests, or test answer sheets must never be copied, since it is the business of the copyright owner to supply them for consumption.
For certain, if you have the time to gain permission from the copyright holder, and do not, or if you don't meet the other three requirements, you are infringing on copyright. The UH Copyright Guidelines have several examples of what is or isn't fair use and the rationale involved.
COPYING FOR LIBRARY RESERVE
This seems to be a gray area because specific guidelines haven't been agreed upon, but the UH Copyright Guidelines suggests strongly that the "fair use" rules be applied here as well. Originals are best material to place on reserve. If permission for placing copies on reserve can be obtained, do that and comply with the copyright holder's terms. Unless a work appears mid semester there should be enough time to get either an original or permission to use material copied from an original to place on reserve. Long distance telephone lines and "next day air" shipping means that any commercially available work is available on very short notice. The number of copies on reserve depends on the class size, number of sections or other factors that determine the demand for the material. Again, if you have made and documented reasonable efforts to obtain originals and cannot, you may be covered, but retain your documentation. Publishers will often give permission for a short duplication run of a commercially unavailable work. They want you to use their work, especially if they think you will continue to use (and buy) it once it becomes available. Again, the UH Copyright Guidelines have several examples of what is or isn't fair use and the rationale involved.
LIBRARY PHOTOCOPYING
There is a special section of the copyright code that deals with the use of copyrighted works by libraries. They are governed by a "fair use" doctrine which is more demanding than that which governs individual use and they will be familiar with the provisions of the doctrine.
Users of libraries often want copies of copyrighted materials, but there are six conditions to be met. The copy must be brief, but can't be sheet music, pictures, sculpture (don't ask how this is done), movies, or audio-visual works other than news programs. The copy must become the property of the user. The work must be only be used for private study, scholarship or research. The library must display a copyright warning notice on the copy order form and where orders are accepted. The copy made by the library must include a copyright notice. Requests for copies of the same material must be isolated and unrelated, reproduction and distribution of multiple copies is not allowed. If a work is commercially unavailable and all efforts to get the work through commercial channels have failed (and are documented), the library may make a copy of a complete work providing that the last five conditions listed are met. The infringement liability, however, rests with the patron in this instance, not the library.
Once the library has posted the copyright warning notice at their coin operated copiers, the responsibility for copyright infringement rests with the copy machine patron. Librarians aren't lawyers, so they won't be able to settle "borderline" questions if you ask them. The best recourse is to look at the UH Copyright Guidelines if you have a specific question about library copying.
Types of Works
PICTORIAL WORKS
Pictorial works or graphics are copyright protected regardless of their medium or of the medium to which you may want to transfer them, such as digitizing a copyrighted image, which is still a reproduction. The owner of an authorized copy of a work can transfer, rent, lend, sell or give the copy away without the copyright owner's permission. The copy can also be displayed, but additional copies cannot be made nor can the image be transmitted to another location, or be used to make derivative works.
An additional complication is that copyrighted images belonging to individuals other than the copyright owner of the work which includes the images are protected. This remains the case, even if the larger work has no copyright notice. Certain images, such a signed fine arts images or other works produced in limited (200 or fewer copies) enjoy additional protection to maintain their integrity.
The general rules for fair use, i.e. brevity, spontaneity, cumulative effect and terms of copying, apply to images as well as text. Permission should be sought for any form of reproduction of a copyrighted image, even if the reproduction is an unintended result of another process, such as the capturing of the image on a video tape of a lecture where the image has been displayed with an overhead projector and is in the background behind the lecturer or is shown for illustration. Merely showing, but not copying and distributing an authorized copy of an image is no problem, as long as it is not shown, or transmitted beyond the confines of a single campus (telecourse instructors, please note). Reproduction and distribution is, and permission should be sought. Technical illustrations used for training may be approved for use by a manufacturer for inclusion in class materials with a simple acknowledgement, but permission should be obtained. Again, the UH Copyright Guidelines have several examples of what is or isn't fair use for images and the rationale involved.
COPYRIGHTED MUSIC
The owner of a copyrighted music work owns the rights to the sheet music, but the owner of an authorized copy may play the copy, unless it is for public performance, but may not copy it in any medium or use it for derivative works without permission. There are guidelines for use of copying and performance of music in educational settings and the University does have blanket permission through licenses from performing rights societies for their repertoires.
The rules for copying of sheet music are very much like those for the copying and use of written or graphic works. Single copies, or edited copies for use, but not distribution of recorded works owned personally or by the University, can be made but must be retained, not distributed. Performance of music in the BMI or ASCAP repertoire, sponsored by the University, in a University facility is (probably) permissible, but the license must be checked at Procurement and Property Management Office (PPMO) to be sure that specific conditions are met. Dramatic performances of music are not permitted without a special license, obtainable through PPMO.
Library/Media Center personnel should be especially concerned with the possible duplication of entire copyrighted tapes, since that circumstance doesn't meet the brevity test for fair use, and should warn a user who expresses the intent to copy a whole tape that such an act would be a violation. A copy of a portion of a tape or vinyl recording for educational use would probably be permissible, depending on the size of the portion, but the duplication of an entire recording would not be, and buying the work is the proper alternative. The Library/Media Center can make one circulating copy as long as the original is not circulated. Again,the UH Copyright Guidelines have several examples of what is or isn't fair use for music and the rationale involved.
COMPUTER SOFTWARE
Regardless of the discussions about the validity of Software License Agreements (SLA), the University policy is that an SLA should be considered an enforceable contract. Usually one backup copy is allowable, and when that quits working, it is rendered unusable and another can be made from the archived original. Shareware may be distributed freely, but should be registered if it is useful and used. Freeware may be freely distributed. On copyrighted software the SLA should be the guideline.
University Software is that which is supplied through the University and used in University premises or on University equipment. Only employees, contractors, faculty and students are legally allowed to use University Software, which is usually limited to a single computer per original (and thus, a single backup copy). Exceptions are software which is purchased with a site license for specific number of computers, or copy protected software which is, by design, not meant to be backed up. If you are making a change to a new software package, the old one can be given away or sold, but as a package, and, to make the transition legal, the old version must be purged from the computer. The same holds true for buying an additional machine where a software package installed on the old machine cannot be installed on the new machine unless the version on the old machine is purged. The basic rule is, without a site license, the new machine needs a new software package. A single package that is used occasionally by members of a department or division could be circulated legally, as long as it is used on one machine at a time, and removed when the package goes to another University user. The library can keep an archived original and circulate a copy to University users under the same conditions. Again, the UH Copyright Guidelines have several examples of what is or isn't fair use for software and the rationale involved.
VIDEOTAPES AND OTHER AUDIO-VISUALS
Playing a videotape for yourself or friends, where the pubic cannot view it is not a copyright infringement, but if it is uncontrolled and the public can see it, it is. Making a single copy for educational (not entertainment) use, for a single playing on campus, with a single repeat for reinforcement as necessary is considered "fair use", provided the copy is erased within 45 days of the recording and the original copyright notice is retained. The tape can be reviewed for evaluation, but not replayed for students, and must, in any case, be erased before the 45 day limit. This applies to both Educational TV as well as commercial broadcasts, but this is only a guideline, and a broadcaster could ask for legal remedy even if you are following these guidelines, but isn't likely to. Remember, repeat use of a program, if you plan to do so, should be done only after permission is gained, usually through a license agreement.
Libraries/Media Centers should follow the general guidelines for texts and other materials in terms of copies for archiving, circulation, research and other educational uses. There will be a warning label added to the tape cassette stating the restrictions for use. If the library provides machines for video tape viewing, educational use probably constitutes having an instructor or TA in the room while the tape is being viewed by students, not the public, and the viewing is used for instruction. Viewing by a single person does not appear to be a problem. Again, the UH Copyright Guidelines have several examples of what is or isn't fair use for videotapes or movies and the rationale involved.
Permissions Revisited
Publishers understand the educational needs that instructors have and are usually pleased to grant permission for legitimate educational use of their materials. If you think that what you want to do is borderline, call them and negotiate. 800 numbers are often available to gain permission and usually the fees charged for use are nominal as long as the use doesn't have significant impact on the publisher's market. If you plan to write for permission, 6 to 8 weeks is a good lead time. Asking permission is a demonstration of good faith as well as being the legally correct thing to do. It might seem like a humbug, but get permission if you plan to use copyrighted materials.
If You Get Caught
Penalties can be severe. Monetary damages may be awarded, you may be responsible for attorney's fees on both sides. And if you violate copyright while carrying out your duties as a State employee, the State is involved and responsible for your actions.
If you infringe someone else's copyright, you may be liable for monetary damages. The statute allows the copyright owner to recover not only actual losses (for example lost sales revenue), but also any profits of the infringer, as long as no monetary amount is counted twice. If actual damages and profits are small or hard to prove, the copyright holder may recover statutory damages of up to $10,000 per week infringed, or up to $50,000 per work infringed willfully.
A court may also award attorney's fees to a successful plaintiff. If the court does so, the infringer has to pay not only his own attorney's fees for defending the suit, but also the plaintiff's attorney's fees for bringing the suit.
Do not, however, assume that the State will hire a lawyer to defend you, since there is a published policy against copyright infringement by State employees. You may be on your own, defending yourself at your own expense and liable for any damages. Protect yourself and do not violate the copyright laws.
Copyright rules and the University of Hawaii policy relating to copyright and duplication seem to be antithetical to a primary goal of education -- access to information. It is easy to be incensed at limitations for photocopying of copyrighted documents and materials. But for another viewpoint, ask some of your colleagues who have published whether they would prefer that you copy an original or buy their book (and allow them to earn their royalty).
The intent of copyright is to assure the authors of creative and other published works an incentive to produce something that won't be stolen -- the right to the fruits of their labor. We chafe when copyright interferes with the easy delivery (because it is an unauthorized duplication of an original work) of information to our students.
For the UH system, the final authority (leaving the courts out of this, and providing this guide is an attempt to keep us all out of court) should be the April, 1992 UH Copyright Guidelines, which is 63 pages of explanation and examples of the application of copyright rules.
WHAT IS COPYRIGHTED?
The scope of the law is broad. It generally protects any expression recorded in any tangible form, published or unpublished, in any medium, with some exceptions noted below. The protection is automatic. A copyright notice is not necessary, but its presence is an emphatic assurance that the author intends the work to be fully protected. Unpublished works are copyrighted as well, regardless of the date of their creation.
WHAT IS NOT COPYRIGHTED?
* Federal publications, but not necessarily publications of State, Local, or Foreign Governments. If Federal publications contain "derived" material from some of these other publications, then you may not have the right to use them.
* Works published before 1/1/78 without a copyright notice. Between 1/1/78 and 3/1/89 a work without a copyright notice may be public domain, but very specific conditions apply, so see the April 1992 UH Copyright Guidelines to be sure. After 3/1/89, consider anything to be copyrighted, even if no notice is present.
* Works with an expired copyright, generally 75 years after publication or 100 years after creation may be used, unless the copyright was renewed. 75 years after the last date of publication seems to be a good guideline.
* Facts and ideas are not copyrighted, but for certain works paraphrasing, using the same plot, sequence, organization, structure, arrangement or style as a preexisting work is prohibited, whether this be a literary work, film or algorithm.
USING COPYRIGHTED WORKS
With specific exceptions, which we'll get to later, only the copyright owner may do or authorize the following:
* Reproduce the work in any form or medium
* Prepare a work that is based on or derived from the original work in any form or medium.
* Distribute copies of the work by sale, gift, rental, lease or lending.
* Performing the work, live or by other medium.
* Displaying a work, either directly or by telecommunications.
If you don't own the copyright, ask yourself:
1. Is the work in the public domain?
2. Do I have the owner's permission to use it?
3. Does a legal exception apply to my proposed use?
4. Does "fair use" apply here?
If you can't say "yes" to one of these but go ahead and use the material anyway, you are violating the copyright laws. You might say, "I'll take the risk, they'll never go after me," but doing so puts the College and others employed by the College at risk. And given the legal climate these days, the risk is significant. There is a simple solution: follow the "fair use" doctrine and get permission for use of copyrighted materials.
PUBLIC DOMAIN
If the work says that it is in the public domain, then it is. A published work with a date earlier than 75 years ago is probably public domain, and in fact, some companies make a good living by republishing such works and copyrighting them in their new format.
Permission
This is a grand thing to have, and since the copyright laws have become more stringent, publishers are set up to give permission for educational use, in many cases, with a minimum of fuss, sometimes by phone using an 800 number. Writing or calling for permission certainly shows good intent after using material under the fair use doctrine, and it is the way to go if subsequent use of the material is planned. Quite often, technical publications may be used with an acknowledgement because the manufacturer who provides the material wants technicians as well educated about their products. This does vary with the manufacturer and should be checked before use.
WHAT YOUR REQUEST FOR PERMISSION SHOULD CONTAIN
1. Title, author(s), or editor(s), edition number(s)
2. Exact amount of material used, preferably including a photocopy of the material involved in the request
3. Number of copies to be made
4. Description of how the material is to be used, for what course, and the frequency of use if for more than one occasion
5. Process of duplication (photocopy, off-set, litho, ditto, etc.)
The UH Copyright Guidelines have several examples of Permission Letters for both classroom use and for republishing copyrighted materials.
LEGAL (STATUTORY) EXCEPTIONS
The owners of an authorized copy of a copyrighted work can do just about anything they want with it except for making more copies, preparing derivative works, performing any work publicly or displaying the work by telecommunication. If the work is software or a sound recording it cannot be rented for profit.
A university is covered for some activities. Libraries and archives can duplicate works for preservation, security or copy replacement and make limited copies for their library users.
Fair Use
This is the key to whether or not the use you propose for a work is legal. Although the language of the Copy Right Law (Section 107) refers to education twice, educational use of copyrighted material is not automatically fair. Educational use is only "fair use" if justified, after examination of all the facts and circumstances, in light of the four factors as specified below and the other four significant factors. A nonprofit, educational purpose addresses only the first of the four factors: the "purpose and character of use."
Of the four factors, the "market effect" is the most important. The Constitution demands economic incentives, and any unauthorized use that adversely impacts the market for the original work directly undermines the economic incentive the Constitution requires. Thus, if any use of copyrighted materials that you propose is likely to substitute for purchase, subscription, or license of the original material and thereby deprive the copyright owner of revenue, that use is likely to be unfair.
The following are simplified explanations of common examples of fair use. Check the UH Copyright Guidelines for details or if you have questions.
STANDARDS FOR DETERMINING FAIR USE
The Fair Use Provision of the Copyrights Act of 1976 is found in Section 107 United States Code 17, and is intended to balance the interests of copyright owners with the needs of others who need access to copyrighted material. There are four general factors to be considered when evaluating whether material can be considered to be "Fair Use", and four "other factors" which have been the subject of court cases:
FOUR MAIN FACTORS
1. PURPOSE AND CHARACTER OF THE USE
Is the use for nonprofit, educational, or commercial use? Be aware that several courts have held that absence of financial gain is insufficient for a finding of fair use.
2. NATURE OF THE COPYRIGHTED WORK
Is the work creative or informational? Special consideration is given to the distinction between the two. Duplication of materials originally developed for classroom use (creative) is less likely to be fair use than the duplication of materials prepared for public consumption.
If you copy a workbook page or a chapter from a textbook you are more directly depriving the copyright holder of profits more directly than if you are copying a page from the newspaper.
3. AMOUNT, SUBSTANTIALITY, OR PORTION TO BE USED IN RELATION TO THE COPYRIGHTED WORK AS A WHOLE
What is the amount and significance of the portion copied?
4. EFFECT OF USE ON THE POTENTIAL MARKET
Probably the most important of the standards. If the copying of the copyrighted material reduces the potential market and therefore the potential sales and profit, that use is unlikely to be found a fair use.
OTHER STATUTORY FACTORS
The fair use doctrine is the first statutory version of a judicial doctrine dating back more than 100 years. Prior to 1976, fair use was a flexible common law doctrine. There is nothing in the present Fair Use doctrine that would prohibit reliance on these approaches in the future.
1. FUNCTIONAL USE TEST or substitute effect test:
To the extent that a copied work is used to substitute of a purchased copy, it is more likely to diminish the copyright owner's profits. The more you copy the more you harm, however, to the extent that you use the material in a different way than that which it was originally intended for, the likelihood that this would be considered fair use is increased.
2. PRODUCTIVE USE TEST:
The term "productive" is used two different ways: 1) Use of a copyrighted work that creates a new work, 2) Use that produces some ultimate benefit to society. A productive use must be contrasted with a convenient use; mere convenience has never been consider adequate rationale for fair use.
3. PUBLIC INTEREST FACTOR:
Is a legitimate public interest served by the use or distribution of this copyrighted work? Do the copyrighted materials "need" to be used in providing public interest with the "fullest information available"?
4. AVAILABILITY TEST:
Is the work readily available for purchase or through normal channels? If it is not, the work is more likely to be considered as a fair use.
Copying
COPYING FOR INDIVIDUAL USE
Making a single copy of written material for use by an individual student or instructor without further dissemination is permissible within limits. The copy can be circulated or displayed in a classroom if returned. The general limits are single chapters of a book, a short story, essay or poem, a graphic or picture, or an article from a periodical, journal or newspaper. If you wish to copy more than that, a reasonable effort to contact the author, publisher or copyright owner needs to be made to ensure that the work is not available through commercial sources at a fair price. Document your efforts and if you can't obtain what you need commercially, you may copy only what you need for use. If you do find a commercial source, then you can copy the original material that you have access to, as long as you destroy it when your original arrives. Repeated duplication from a periodical implies that you should subscribe.
COPYING FOR DISTRIBUTION TO STUDENTS
Since you would be making a number of copies instead of one, the potential for loss by a copyright holder is much greater, and the rules for this use are more strict. We all see material which would benefit our students, but in order for the use to be fair there are four requirements to meet: brevity, spontaneity, cumulative effect, and terms of copying.
Brevity means 250 words for a poem, 2,500 words for a complete prose article or 1000 words from a longer work, one illustration per book or periodical.
Spontaneity means there isn't reasonable time to get permission before using the item for maximum educational effect. This means you can use it once. If you wish to use it again you would presumably have time to gain permission.
Cumulative effect means that you use it for one course, or use one short poem, article, story or essay and no more than two excerpts per author per term, or no more than three excerpts from a collective work or periodical (other than current newspapers), or no more than nine instances of multiple copying per course per term.
The terms of copying to satisfy are no more than one copy per student, no profit if copying costs are charged to the student, a copyright notice from the original must be included in each copy, the copies may not be used to create or replace anthologies, compilations or collective works whether the copies are made in batches or separately. Consumables such as workbooks, standardized tests, or test answer sheets must never be copied, since it is the business of the copyright owner to supply them for consumption.
For certain, if you have the time to gain permission from the copyright holder, and do not, or if you don't meet the other three requirements, you are infringing on copyright. The UH Copyright Guidelines have several examples of what is or isn't fair use and the rationale involved.
COPYING FOR LIBRARY RESERVE
This seems to be a gray area because specific guidelines haven't been agreed upon, but the UH Copyright Guidelines suggests strongly that the "fair use" rules be applied here as well. Originals are best material to place on reserve. If permission for placing copies on reserve can be obtained, do that and comply with the copyright holder's terms. Unless a work appears mid semester there should be enough time to get either an original or permission to use material copied from an original to place on reserve. Long distance telephone lines and "next day air" shipping means that any commercially available work is available on very short notice. The number of copies on reserve depends on the class size, number of sections or other factors that determine the demand for the material. Again, if you have made and documented reasonable efforts to obtain originals and cannot, you may be covered, but retain your documentation. Publishers will often give permission for a short duplication run of a commercially unavailable work. They want you to use their work, especially if they think you will continue to use (and buy) it once it becomes available. Again, the UH Copyright Guidelines have several examples of what is or isn't fair use and the rationale involved.
LIBRARY PHOTOCOPYING
There is a special section of the copyright code that deals with the use of copyrighted works by libraries. They are governed by a "fair use" doctrine which is more demanding than that which governs individual use and they will be familiar with the provisions of the doctrine.
Users of libraries often want copies of copyrighted materials, but there are six conditions to be met. The copy must be brief, but can't be sheet music, pictures, sculpture (don't ask how this is done), movies, or audio-visual works other than news programs. The copy must become the property of the user. The work must be only be used for private study, scholarship or research. The library must display a copyright warning notice on the copy order form and where orders are accepted. The copy made by the library must include a copyright notice. Requests for copies of the same material must be isolated and unrelated, reproduction and distribution of multiple copies is not allowed. If a work is commercially unavailable and all efforts to get the work through commercial channels have failed (and are documented), the library may make a copy of a complete work providing that the last five conditions listed are met. The infringement liability, however, rests with the patron in this instance, not the library.
Once the library has posted the copyright warning notice at their coin operated copiers, the responsibility for copyright infringement rests with the copy machine patron. Librarians aren't lawyers, so they won't be able to settle "borderline" questions if you ask them. The best recourse is to look at the UH Copyright Guidelines if you have a specific question about library copying.
Types of Works
PICTORIAL WORKS
Pictorial works or graphics are copyright protected regardless of their medium or of the medium to which you may want to transfer them, such as digitizing a copyrighted image, which is still a reproduction. The owner of an authorized copy of a work can transfer, rent, lend, sell or give the copy away without the copyright owner's permission. The copy can also be displayed, but additional copies cannot be made nor can the image be transmitted to another location, or be used to make derivative works.
An additional complication is that copyrighted images belonging to individuals other than the copyright owner of the work which includes the images are protected. This remains the case, even if the larger work has no copyright notice. Certain images, such a signed fine arts images or other works produced in limited (200 or fewer copies) enjoy additional protection to maintain their integrity.
The general rules for fair use, i.e. brevity, spontaneity, cumulative effect and terms of copying, apply to images as well as text. Permission should be sought for any form of reproduction of a copyrighted image, even if the reproduction is an unintended result of another process, such as the capturing of the image on a video tape of a lecture where the image has been displayed with an overhead projector and is in the background behind the lecturer or is shown for illustration. Merely showing, but not copying and distributing an authorized copy of an image is no problem, as long as it is not shown, or transmitted beyond the confines of a single campus (telecourse instructors, please note). Reproduction and distribution is, and permission should be sought. Technical illustrations used for training may be approved for use by a manufacturer for inclusion in class materials with a simple acknowledgement, but permission should be obtained. Again, the UH Copyright Guidelines have several examples of what is or isn't fair use for images and the rationale involved.
COPYRIGHTED MUSIC
The owner of a copyrighted music work owns the rights to the sheet music, but the owner of an authorized copy may play the copy, unless it is for public performance, but may not copy it in any medium or use it for derivative works without permission. There are guidelines for use of copying and performance of music in educational settings and the University does have blanket permission through licenses from performing rights societies for their repertoires.
The rules for copying of sheet music are very much like those for the copying and use of written or graphic works. Single copies, or edited copies for use, but not distribution of recorded works owned personally or by the University, can be made but must be retained, not distributed. Performance of music in the BMI or ASCAP repertoire, sponsored by the University, in a University facility is (probably) permissible, but the license must be checked at Procurement and Property Management Office (PPMO) to be sure that specific conditions are met. Dramatic performances of music are not permitted without a special license, obtainable through PPMO.
Library/Media Center personnel should be especially concerned with the possible duplication of entire copyrighted tapes, since that circumstance doesn't meet the brevity test for fair use, and should warn a user who expresses the intent to copy a whole tape that such an act would be a violation. A copy of a portion of a tape or vinyl recording for educational use would probably be permissible, depending on the size of the portion, but the duplication of an entire recording would not be, and buying the work is the proper alternative. The Library/Media Center can make one circulating copy as long as the original is not circulated. Again,the UH Copyright Guidelines have several examples of what is or isn't fair use for music and the rationale involved.
COMPUTER SOFTWARE
Regardless of the discussions about the validity of Software License Agreements (SLA), the University policy is that an SLA should be considered an enforceable contract. Usually one backup copy is allowable, and when that quits working, it is rendered unusable and another can be made from the archived original. Shareware may be distributed freely, but should be registered if it is useful and used. Freeware may be freely distributed. On copyrighted software the SLA should be the guideline.
University Software is that which is supplied through the University and used in University premises or on University equipment. Only employees, contractors, faculty and students are legally allowed to use University Software, which is usually limited to a single computer per original (and thus, a single backup copy). Exceptions are software which is purchased with a site license for specific number of computers, or copy protected software which is, by design, not meant to be backed up. If you are making a change to a new software package, the old one can be given away or sold, but as a package, and, to make the transition legal, the old version must be purged from the computer. The same holds true for buying an additional machine where a software package installed on the old machine cannot be installed on the new machine unless the version on the old machine is purged. The basic rule is, without a site license, the new machine needs a new software package. A single package that is used occasionally by members of a department or division could be circulated legally, as long as it is used on one machine at a time, and removed when the package goes to another University user. The library can keep an archived original and circulate a copy to University users under the same conditions. Again, the UH Copyright Guidelines have several examples of what is or isn't fair use for software and the rationale involved.
VIDEOTAPES AND OTHER AUDIO-VISUALS
Playing a videotape for yourself or friends, where the pubic cannot view it is not a copyright infringement, but if it is uncontrolled and the public can see it, it is. Making a single copy for educational (not entertainment) use, for a single playing on campus, with a single repeat for reinforcement as necessary is considered "fair use", provided the copy is erased within 45 days of the recording and the original copyright notice is retained. The tape can be reviewed for evaluation, but not replayed for students, and must, in any case, be erased before the 45 day limit. This applies to both Educational TV as well as commercial broadcasts, but this is only a guideline, and a broadcaster could ask for legal remedy even if you are following these guidelines, but isn't likely to. Remember, repeat use of a program, if you plan to do so, should be done only after permission is gained, usually through a license agreement.
Libraries/Media Centers should follow the general guidelines for texts and other materials in terms of copies for archiving, circulation, research and other educational uses. There will be a warning label added to the tape cassette stating the restrictions for use. If the library provides machines for video tape viewing, educational use probably constitutes having an instructor or TA in the room while the tape is being viewed by students, not the public, and the viewing is used for instruction. Viewing by a single person does not appear to be a problem. Again, the UH Copyright Guidelines have several examples of what is or isn't fair use for videotapes or movies and the rationale involved.
Permissions Revisited
Publishers understand the educational needs that instructors have and are usually pleased to grant permission for legitimate educational use of their materials. If you think that what you want to do is borderline, call them and negotiate. 800 numbers are often available to gain permission and usually the fees charged for use are nominal as long as the use doesn't have significant impact on the publisher's market. If you plan to write for permission, 6 to 8 weeks is a good lead time. Asking permission is a demonstration of good faith as well as being the legally correct thing to do. It might seem like a humbug, but get permission if you plan to use copyrighted materials.
If You Get Caught
Penalties can be severe. Monetary damages may be awarded, you may be responsible for attorney's fees on both sides. And if you violate copyright while carrying out your duties as a State employee, the State is involved and responsible for your actions.
If you infringe someone else's copyright, you may be liable for monetary damages. The statute allows the copyright owner to recover not only actual losses (for example lost sales revenue), but also any profits of the infringer, as long as no monetary amount is counted twice. If actual damages and profits are small or hard to prove, the copyright holder may recover statutory damages of up to $10,000 per week infringed, or up to $50,000 per work infringed willfully.
A court may also award attorney's fees to a successful plaintiff. If the court does so, the infringer has to pay not only his own attorney's fees for defending the suit, but also the plaintiff's attorney's fees for bringing the suit.
Do not, however, assume that the State will hire a lawyer to defend you, since there is a published policy against copyright infringement by State employees. You may be on your own, defending yourself at your own expense and liable for any damages. Protect yourself and do not violate the copyright laws.
The first key in understanding copyright law is defining what it is these laws protect. Creative work is defined as being a production based on the thoughts, expressions, or imagination of an individual which developed with a physical existing form.
Simple thoughts held in a persons' mind are not creative works. However, they make take the form of creative works when developed through writing, art, etc. There is also a form which inhibits creative editing or collecting of work which allows the creative organization of the facts to be copyrighted. This is called a compilation copyright. In some areas it has specific guidelines. In any case, knowing the laws of creativity is beneficial.
The purpose of these copyright laws is to offer the creator exclusive rights and control over who may copy their work or compose variations involving their work. These laws provide these creators with secure protection and initiate penalties for those who violate the creators rights. It also gives the creator the ability to sell or license their work.
Most often, copyright has to do with commerce. Commerce involves the social relations involved in trade or exchange of goods and services. To be enforced it's logical that creative works should have some commercial value. Which means its not only suitable for a large market but gives quality to the particular market it's associated with. As an example, brainstorming would not be significant to copyright protection and of course has little or no value to anyone other than the person it developed from. However, what is developed from the brainstorming may be seen by others as valuable.
Something as simple as your opinion can be seen as valuable if it is documented physically and in creative form. While copyright violations aren't carried over into e-mail and forum postings caution is still needed in places such as USENET and others on the web. These places are huge and considered to be 100 percent publication.
There are some complexities in copyright law which allow certain types of copying without given permission to which it is felt that important social principles would possibly be violated. This is often associated with the concept of review or illustration of a particular point. Most major nations uphold the Berne copyright convention which states that the moment a work is created in a physical form, it's copyrighted. There is no legal notification necessary and it's not necessary to register. However, in the event of legal action, registration is often required.
Copyright continues seventy years after its creator is deceased. Copyright is a matter of common decency and respect. Taking something which doesn't belong to you without permission is theft and considered punishable by law.
Simple thoughts held in a persons' mind are not creative works. However, they make take the form of creative works when developed through writing, art, etc. There is also a form which inhibits creative editing or collecting of work which allows the creative organization of the facts to be copyrighted. This is called a compilation copyright. In some areas it has specific guidelines. In any case, knowing the laws of creativity is beneficial.
The purpose of these copyright laws is to offer the creator exclusive rights and control over who may copy their work or compose variations involving their work. These laws provide these creators with secure protection and initiate penalties for those who violate the creators rights. It also gives the creator the ability to sell or license their work.
Most often, copyright has to do with commerce. Commerce involves the social relations involved in trade or exchange of goods and services. To be enforced it's logical that creative works should have some commercial value. Which means its not only suitable for a large market but gives quality to the particular market it's associated with. As an example, brainstorming would not be significant to copyright protection and of course has little or no value to anyone other than the person it developed from. However, what is developed from the brainstorming may be seen by others as valuable.
Something as simple as your opinion can be seen as valuable if it is documented physically and in creative form. While copyright violations aren't carried over into e-mail and forum postings caution is still needed in places such as USENET and others on the web. These places are huge and considered to be 100 percent publication.
There are some complexities in copyright law which allow certain types of copying without given permission to which it is felt that important social principles would possibly be violated. This is often associated with the concept of review or illustration of a particular point. Most major nations uphold the Berne copyright convention which states that the moment a work is created in a physical form, it's copyrighted. There is no legal notification necessary and it's not necessary to register. However, in the event of legal action, registration is often required.
Copyright continues seventy years after its creator is deceased. Copyright is a matter of common decency and respect. Taking something which doesn't belong to you without permission is theft and considered punishable by law.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)