Copyright protection
November 4th, 2006 — VyomaThis post is a direct result of some discussions I had with Thilak over at TechBuzz. There was an incident of plagiarism by a person, and Thilak could, after some effort get a public apology. And later, we had some discussion over at another thread of his, where a harmless looking picture of Bart Simpson was used.
Copyright protection applies from the time the work was created in a fixed form. The work may be literary, music, video, artwork and other intellectual works. The copyright applies even if the © symbol is displayed or not along with the work. The copyright give the owner of the work exclusive rights over it. No one can use the work, without express permission from the owner.
The only limitation of the copyright would be the ‘fair use’ clause. The use of such work for critisism, news reporting, teaching, research or similar purposes would not be constituted as copyright infringement. A particular use, can be judged as a ‘fair use’ or not by the following point of views:
- the purpose is for commercial or non-profit
- the amount of copyrighted work used
- the effect of use on the (potential) market value of the copyrighted work
That means, we are not allowed to use those images of our favorite cartoon characters in our blogs, or websites, if we are not specifically writing about it. That would also mean that the numerous galleries of actors and actresses would need to get written permission from the photographers or studios, in order to be legal websites.
It may sound harsh on the numerous blog publishers and website hobbyists, but that is the nature of copyrighted works. To go against these, stating that one does not make ’significant’ revenue, would be against the ethics. A clear understanding on the implication would arise if one were to go into the shoes of such writers, artists, photographers, or any other ‘intellectual property creators’.
There are other kinds of works that can be derived upon - that can be used for various purposes. Such licenses range from rights of attribution to public domain licenses. Look out for write ups on this issue in coming days.
November 4th, 2006 at 4:34 pm
Its so stupid of me !!, I never knew its implecations
November 5th, 2006 at 7:16 am
But you did understand it and correct it Thilak. You could do that because you yourself write in your blog and understood the value of creation.
There are a lot other out there who flaunt the copyrights of others, and justify it by saying everyone is doing it.
November 6th, 2006 at 1:00 pm
This write up was really informative. Though I am not much of a creator… but never thought copyright issues has such huge impact, both on the creator and on the one who is using the content illegally.
November 6th, 2006 at 5:00 pm
Yes, Rosalin, it does have impact on the creator. And there are enough works in public domain that can be used for most of the purposes. There are various other works that are out in a spectrum of licenses that may be used in various cases. It just takes some effort to go and find out, and I think that much we owe to the creators.
November 6th, 2006 at 7:42 pm
[...] Well, here is something that I promised myself I would write about in my other post about Copyrights. A copyright restricts the distribution of any work and also distribution of any modifications to such works. [...]
November 13th, 2006 at 3:15 pm
[...] This post seemingly comes in the right moment, after the posts on copyright and creative commons licenses. I found out about Lisensa through the blog post by Darren Rowse. [...]
December 30th, 2006 at 9:37 am
Cheap effective copyright registration @
http://www.icreateditfirst.com