A Study On An Online Course

In “The Bedford Researcher,” Mike Palmquist (2015), identifies the consequences regarding work that has been plagiarized, and plagiarism is taken very seriously, because it guards intellectual property, and recognizes academic work has owners, this “protects an author’s time and energy that is invested into creating a document” (p. 127). Plagiarism can be an accidental or deliberate use of someone’s else’s ideas, thoughts, writings, and evidence without giving credit to the source(Palmquist, 2015, p. 127).

The video A Fair(y) Use Tale Trial by Professor Eric Faden was created with the purpose of educating it’s viewers about Fair Use principles. It creates a transformative work through different Disney movie clips each only a few seconds long strung together in order to explain Fair Use and Copyright in an entertaining and original way. The video is noncommercial, and no profit was gained by Professor Faden in producing the work or after it was displayed.

The expressive use exception has a “caveat” and it is not available if it meets three conditions: “the work does not contain an image or likeness that is primarily commercial, not transformative and is not otherwise protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution or New York Constitution.”

A motion for summary judgment is granted when the similarities concern only non-copyrightable elements of an allegedly infringed work or when no reasonable trier of fact could find the works substantially similar. Boisson v. Banian, Ltd., 273 F.3d 273 (2d Cir. 2001); Castle Rock Entm 't, Inc. v. Carol Publ 'g Grp., Inc., 150 F.3d 132 (2d Cir. 1998); Williams v. Crichton, 84 F.3d 581 (2d Cir. 1996); Walker v. Time Life Films, Inc., 784 F.2d 44 (2d Cir 1986). When the works contain protectable and unprotectable elements, the court applies a more discerning test, extracting the unprotectable elements from the works and asking whether the protectable elements, standing alone, are substantially similar. Knitwaves Inc. Lollytogs Ltd., 71 F.3d 996 (2d Cir. 1995) The discerning ordinary observer test must be applied in conjunction with the total concept and feel after the unprotectable elements are eliminated from consideration. Boisson, 273 F.3d 273. An allegedly infringing work is considered substantially similar to a copyrighted work if the ordinary lay observer unless he set out to detect the disparities, would regard the two works appeal as the same. Boisson 273 F.3d 273; Knitwaves, 71 F.3d 996. In determining whether or not the allegedly infringing work falls below the quantitative

This is important to protect a creator 's moral and economic rights and integrity of their work: So they are recognised as the creator of their work (no one else is identified as the creator) able to protect their work from derogatory treatment; inappropriate modification, distortion or other interference with its integrity. Appropriation is not copying or visual plagiarism.

(3) To distribute copies of the photograph to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending

The second approach to copyright is the democratic approach. All works of art are ideas built on a foundation of other ideas. The democratic approach advocates that intellectual property belongs to the society and should be available for the general good of the public. If the particular usage is intended to derive financial benefit or any other business-related benefits, it is considered inappropriate usage. If the utilization of factual work were more usable than the use of someone’s creative work, then that would not be fair use. There is no specified edge to the amount of quoted work that can be called “fair use.” The courts exercise common sense to determine if it was too much. If the utilization of the material created market or stirred a competition, and if the fair use diminishes demand for the original product, it is not considered as appropriate use (Crews, 1993).

During fair use trials judges are supposed to at least these “four factors” 1. The purpose of the use 2. The nature of the work used 3. The amount and sustainability of the original work used 4. The effect on the market of the original, as well as the overall purposes of copyright law.

In the article "When Stealing Isn't Stealing" the author explains that an individual’s original work should be lawfully protected.

In part one of this paper I will be discussing fair use in detail. I will be covering why fair use is important, how fair use has developed over time, as well as the four factors in determining whether or not a piece of work qualifies under fair use.

Have valid reasons for infringe another’s copyright under certain situations that are legal without permission from the copyright owner. It must be determined that the use is only for non-commercial or nonprofit purposes by considering “the nature of the copyrighted work”, “the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole”, and “the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work” (Copyright Act). Examples include collections in libraries open to the public or related to academic research.

In the article “Recut, Reframe, Recycle”, the authors state that the four factors that the Copyright Act refers to when considering fair use are: 1). The purpose and character of the use, 2). The nature of the copyrighted work, 3). The amount of the work that was used, and 4). The effect on the potential market for value of the copyrighted work (profit). The purpose of the “Fair(y) Use Tale” remix film was intended for entertainment and educate viewers about copyright and fair use principles. The film was noncommercial, creative

Fair use is a defense to copyright infringement that essentially asks of any particular use; Is this fair?

It is ironic, then, that “fair use” is the copyright issue most likely to confront an average copyright user. Fair use issues arise in a wide variety of everyday contexts, including the classroom, the boardroom, the record industry, the theater, and the movie industry. Typical fair use conflicts likely to arise in practice include:

Many infringement claims involve simple cases of copyright infringement where the copying is obvious. Others, however, are more difficult to resolve because copyright protection is not limited to exact copying. It is inevitable that creative and commercial works will take inspiration from the culture at large, and it is often challenging to determine when this "inspiration" has crossed the line into infringement. There also may be a question of whether the allegedly infringed work is even protected by copyright. Unprotected works may include, for example, compilations of facts that lack the requisite creativity to be covered by copyright, or those works that are in the public domain because the copyright term expired.