I am GLAD that our CFF coaching program brought this bat out and allowed us the freedom to start swinging at our assumptions!

I am thinking about Dave’s comment. the crux of copyright is that when you create something, you get control. You can control the who-what-where-when-why for publishing, performing, distributing…everything. This is a misconception. There were situations shared that I thought for SURE would not be a fair use of materials but under the definition of transformativeness were able to be used even FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES. One example was where a book publisher sought permission to use a poster (initially intended to promote a concert) in a book where it would be used to demonstrate how culture was reflected through art of the 60’s. The book publisher sought permission, was denied, sued and WON based on the transformative use of this work. And this is not an excerpt from a single conference this is by

word of an attorney who specializes in copyright law. Yes Tom, it is about time….it is about time that we come out from under the grasp of the copyright office…who gets their meals from the TV, music, and movie industry and stand up for ourselves as educators…do I deserve to be hit with a clue bat for that

Yes, you’re right, I should have said “It is about time someone hit the librarians, technology integrators, ed-tech conference talkers, and Classrooms for the Future coaches with a clue bat.”

My apologies.

http://www.mediaeducationlab.com/index.php?page=265

If you want to take a look at the information shared from an edtech view…I wrote about it as well I hope that folks will continue to contribute THEIR understanding of fair use!
Thanks Will for pointing to these conversations

I think that a good starting point for students would be to use Creative Commons licensed works until they grasp these concepts, and then encourage them to practice fair use with more restrictive/commercial materials. What does everyone else think of that approach?

If i post it on a self-managed blog with an ad from ad-sense am I breaking the law?

Copyright issues seem to be very difficult for most people to understand. A lot of people aren’t able or willing to separate their concept of “what I think should be legal” from making a true assessment of what is legal and fair to the copyright holder.

The crux of copyright is that when you create something, you get control. You can control the who-what-where-when-why for publishing, performing, distributing…everything. If any of these are violated, you can seek damages. The copyright holder is in total control, because they created it.

That protects initial copyright holders, but content creators also need freedom to continue creating without fear of being sued, so there are limits on copyright. Some limits have to do with how long it takes copyright to expire. Some special cases have been identified where other interests can trump copyright protection, like certain uses for news reporting.

One of the special cases that can sometimes trump copyright is immediate classroom use. You can use a copyrighted work as an example if it fits your current class lesson or discussion, but you can’t add it to curriculum for future years or otherwise plan for future use without securing permission from the copyright holder.

All that said, the world is becoming a different place thanks to the web. Ease and prevalence of publishing has made it harder for teachers to use copyrighted materials (since they publish class materials online, they can’t include copyrighted materials as easily with class materials), but easier to find materials licensed for use.

See my first paragraph, though, and don’t take my word for it. Take a real course on Communication Law at a 4-year university.

Transforative use is still a little squishy. For example, fanfiction, the difference between transformative and derivitive is broad and gray.