Copyright
Copyright is literally the right to copy-- copyright protection means that if you create something, you are the only one who can copy, perform, or sell your creation. You are also the only one who can make a derivative work based on your creation (like when a book is made into a movie). Copyright protection is an essential right in our country-- Article I, Section 8 of our Constitution empowers Congress,
"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
Copyright covers books, poems, songs, plays, published articles, software, video games, photos, movies, and other creative works. A special type of copyright called a patent covers technology and inventions, and another type of copyright called a trademark protects business names and logos; these are different from copyrights because patents and trademarks must be applied for, while copyright protection is automatic. Notice that copyright covers actual things--ideas, data, and facts cannot be copyrighted. Government documents are also not protected by copyright.
Pretend you have created a painting. You own the copyright of that painting, meaning that you alone have the right to that painting in any form. No one else can sell prints of the painting or even photograph the painting without your permission as long as you own the copyright. If you want to make money from your painting, you can let a museum pay you to hang it in their gallery for a limited amount of time, or you could sell a company royalties (permission to copy something) to produce products with your painting on it. But be careful--if you sell the original painting itself to the museum or company, you are selling your copyright protection as well.
Pretend you have created a painting. You own the copyright of that painting, meaning that you alone have the right to that painting in any form. No one else can sell prints of the painting or even photograph the painting without your permission as long as you own the copyright. If you want to make money from your painting, you can let a museum pay you to hang it in their gallery for a limited amount of time, or you could sell a company royalties (permission to copy something) to produce products with your painting on it. But be careful--if you sell the original painting itself to the museum or company, you are selling your copyright protection as well.
How long does copyright protection last?
Originally, copyright protection lasted for 28 years. However, over the past couple of centuries, authors have persuaded Congress to extend copyright protection of new works for the life of the author plus 70 years. Sometimes there are corporate authors -- a Disney animated film, for example, has hundreds of people working on it -- and corporations can hold a copyright for either 95 years or 120 years.
Once copyright protection expires, it enters the public domain. A public domain work is a creation that anyone can copy, publish, perform, or reproduce for free. All of Shakespeare's plays, Mark Twain's novels, Beethoven's symphonies, and Vincent Van Gogh's paintings, as well as other works, are free for everyone to copy, remake, or even rewrite because their original copyright has long expired. Some films, such as His Girl Friday, It's a Wonderful Life, and Night of the Living Dead, are also in the public domain because their studios did not apply for copyright protection.
Some creators even voluntarily give up their copyrights. Some online content producers publish as part of the creative commons, meaning you can download and use their software or coding for free as long as you give them credit (more on this later). Tesla Motors recently made the blueprints to their electric cars public, saying that other car companies could use their designs for free as long as they didn't try to patent derivative technology. However, these are the exception: most works of the 20th century, from Superman to Anchorman, are still under copyright protection and can only be copied, published, performed, or reproduced with permission.
Once copyright protection expires, it enters the public domain. A public domain work is a creation that anyone can copy, publish, perform, or reproduce for free. All of Shakespeare's plays, Mark Twain's novels, Beethoven's symphonies, and Vincent Van Gogh's paintings, as well as other works, are free for everyone to copy, remake, or even rewrite because their original copyright has long expired. Some films, such as His Girl Friday, It's a Wonderful Life, and Night of the Living Dead, are also in the public domain because their studios did not apply for copyright protection.
Some creators even voluntarily give up their copyrights. Some online content producers publish as part of the creative commons, meaning you can download and use their software or coding for free as long as you give them credit (more on this later). Tesla Motors recently made the blueprints to their electric cars public, saying that other car companies could use their designs for free as long as they didn't try to patent derivative technology. However, these are the exception: most works of the 20th century, from Superman to Anchorman, are still under copyright protection and can only be copied, published, performed, or reproduced with permission.
Oh no! Does this mean my Twilight fanfic on WattPad is breaking the law?
Twilight fanfic? Really? That's what you do with your spare time? Ugh.
Anyway, don't worry about breaking the law. While Stephanie Meyer owns the rights to Twilight and any published works using her characters and concepts, fanfic is ignored by copyright law unless the fanfic author sells copies of the fanfic or the copyright holder files a complaint. When author E.L. James wanted to sell copies of her Twilight fanfic, she had to change the names of characters and places to avoid violating Stephanie Meyer's copyright protection (this fanfic became 50 Shades of Grey). Even though your fanfic is public and published, neither you or WattPad makes money off the work. Most authors actually the popularity fanfics bring their original works. However, if Stephanie Meyer reads your fanfic and wants it taken down, you would have to comply, but you wouldn't be fined or put in jail as long as you aren't selling copies of your stories or pretending you created Twilight.
Anyway, don't worry about breaking the law. While Stephanie Meyer owns the rights to Twilight and any published works using her characters and concepts, fanfic is ignored by copyright law unless the fanfic author sells copies of the fanfic or the copyright holder files a complaint. When author E.L. James wanted to sell copies of her Twilight fanfic, she had to change the names of characters and places to avoid violating Stephanie Meyer's copyright protection (this fanfic became 50 Shades of Grey). Even though your fanfic is public and published, neither you or WattPad makes money off the work. Most authors actually the popularity fanfics bring their original works. However, if Stephanie Meyer reads your fanfic and wants it taken down, you would have to comply, but you wouldn't be fined or put in jail as long as you aren't selling copies of your stories or pretending you created Twilight.
I bought a Michael Jackson song on iTunes. That means I bought the copyright and can use his song in the background of my YouTube video... right?
Not exactly. You bought a copy of his song, which means you can listen to the song whenever you want, lend the song file to a friend, and even make a copy of the song file to store on both your phone and laptop. However, these are all private uses. The copyright for public use of Michael Jackson's music still belongs to Sony Records and Michael Jackson's family until around 2079. This means you would need permission to play the song to a crowd, perform your own version of the song, or use the song in a video you create.
But what about the thousands of covers of songs on YouTube? Some copyright holders are more flexible than others. Most popular artists allow fans to cover their songs on YouTube because it helps spread the popularity of the original song, which makes them more money (and if an artist wants to sell the recording to fans, they pay the original artist a royalty). This isn't just limited to music: Hasbro animation also allows fans to post entire episodes of their Pound Puppies, My Little Pony, and Littlest Pet Shop television shows because it results in more kids seeing them, which means more toy sales. However, Hasbro does not allow fans to make their own toys or video games based on their characters.
But what about the thousands of covers of songs on YouTube? Some copyright holders are more flexible than others. Most popular artists allow fans to cover their songs on YouTube because it helps spread the popularity of the original song, which makes them more money (and if an artist wants to sell the recording to fans, they pay the original artist a royalty). This isn't just limited to music: Hasbro animation also allows fans to post entire episodes of their Pound Puppies, My Little Pony, and Littlest Pet Shop television shows because it results in more kids seeing them, which means more toy sales. However, Hasbro does not allow fans to make their own toys or video games based on their characters.
Wait... If copying without permission is illegal, my teacher should totally be arrested! The other day, he gave us an article photocopied from National Geographic. Isn't that breaking the law?
Actually, your teacher is not breaking the law because of Fair Use. Fair Use is the exception of copyright, which allows people to use copyrighted material for free for the purposes of...
However, fair use is not a guarantee, even for education. Fair Use is not one-size-fits-all, and is determined on a case-by-case basis. The following four factors need to be determined when claiming fair use:
Let's go back to your teacher. He photocopied an article from National Geographic to give to the class for an assignment. Was this educational Fair Use?
It looks like your teacher photocopied the article legally under Fair Use.
- Education: Both teachers and students have some copyright exceptions when creating projects that further learning
- News reporting: The press can use image and video in order to report and promote a story
- Commentary: If you are creating a review or critique of a book, film, or television show, you may be able to use clips and passages to help make your point
- Research: If you need to find sources of information to further a study or scholarly article, you can cite other published works and media
- Parody: This is where you are making fun of a copyrighted work or character
However, fair use is not a guarantee, even for education. Fair Use is not one-size-fits-all, and is determined on a case-by-case basis. The following four factors need to be determined when claiming fair use:
- The purpose of the use: The use of copyrighted material should have some social benefit, whether its advancing education or knowledge, spreading awareness, or critiquing or mocking an idea. This is sometimes called "transformative use" because you should be transforming the original work into something new. If the primary purpose is to make money, this is not Fair Use.
- The nature of the work: It is harder to claim Fair Use for a creative work than for an information work.
- The amount used: The less you use, the better your case for Fair Use is. Usually, if you copy the "heart" of a work, that is not considered Fair Use (an example is if I wrote a song using the guitar riff from "Satisfaction" by the Rolling Stones).
- The effect on the market: If my use in any way diverts money away from the original content creators, then it is not Fair Use.
Let's go back to your teacher. He photocopied an article from National Geographic to give to the class for an assignment. Was this educational Fair Use?
- The purpose of the use: The article was copied for students to read and then use, whether it was for a discussion, writing assignment, or even to improve reading skills. These are all transfomative use, turning the article's content into knowledge.
- The nature of the work: This is an informational article, used by the teacher to convey facts and research.
- The amount used: Your teacher only used a single article--if he had copied the entire magazine, then there would be a problem, but a single article fits into the idea of "less is more."
- The effect on the market: If your teacher had to pay for a class set of National Geographic magazines, he likely wouldn't have used the article at all, so this photocopying isn't diverting money from National Geographic. Furthermore, National Geographic puts many of its articles online for free anyway, so copying a single article for class use seems consistent with how the magazine charges for articles.
It looks like your teacher photocopied the article legally under Fair Use.
So what do I need to remember about using copyrighted material?
For school projects and academics:
- Keep it short: Rule of thumb is under 2,500 words of a poem, short story, or article; 10% of a novel; 30 seconds of a song; three minutes of video; or five images by the same artist.
- Cite the source: Using any content that is not your own is plagiarism unless you cite the source (see below).
- Perform with caution: For songs, school districts pay for the right for students to perform songs as part of choir, band, orchestra, and talent shows, as well as playing music for dance groups and assemblies. However, be careful when it comes to drama. Performing copyrighted works for a class project, audition, talent show, or forensics meet is Fair Use, but performing a piece for a public audience (think school play or musical) requires permission from the play's author or publishing company.
- When in doubt, ask permission: You can always write a letter to the rights holder asking to use their work; if it's truly Fair Use, they'll say yes.
- When really in doubt, use public domain works: The best way to avoid copyright problems is to just use the free stuff. One great resource for images and media is the Creative Commons website. For public domain stories and texts, look at Project Gutenberg. When performing a Google Search, click on the search settings and change the usage rights to "Labeled for Reuse."
PLAGIARISM
While copyright violation breaks criminal law, plagiarism breaks the most fundamental rules of academic discourse. Plagiarism is simply taking the work of others and passing it off as your own. While this seems clear cut, the degree of plagiarism can vary from case to case. Sometimes, a case of plagiarism is also a copyright violation, but one can be guilty of plagiarizing a public domain work -- just because you can freely print Hamlet doesn't mean that you can take credit for writing Hamlet. Here are the three types of plagiarism:
Direct plagiarism is where one copies the work of someone else and claims it as their own. In my time teaching, I've caught all kinds of direct plagiarism, including:
Indirect plagiarism is often referred to as "accidental plagiarism," as the context around the plagiarized material implies that the student isn't pretending the work is theirs, yet they do not give proper credit to the original author. For example, I've had students add a photo pages of their portfolio they found from the internet without telling where that photo came from. Other students have quoted a person to make a point without referring to where that quote originates from. Most cases of indirect plagiarism revolve around a student citing a fact or an outside idea without including accurate quotation markings or an in-text citation that shows where the information originated. Just because this is often accidental doesn't mean it's excusable; while teachers may be more forgiving of these mistakes as you are learning to write, direct and indirect plagiarism carry the same consequences at most educational institution.
Self-plagiarism is the most nebulous of the three. How can one even plagiarize themselves? Self-plagiarism occurs when a creator submits a previously created work as a new creation or submits a single creation for two different classes. Why is this bad? In academia, creative projects like stories and essays develop skills to improve or change the student. Say a student writes a Lord of the Flies essay freshman year and then uses the same essay again senior year. This violates the spirit of academia wherein student work should show off their current development.
Direct plagiarism is where one copies the work of someone else and claims it as their own. In my time teaching, I've caught all kinds of direct plagiarism, including:
- Directly copying paragraphs from an online article and pasting it into their essay.
- Directly copying paragraphs from an online article and changing every fourth word to try to fool the plagiarism checker (it doesn't work).
- Going into a former student's portfolio and copying one of their stories.
- Copying the model essay I provide as a guide and passing it off as their work
- Retelling Edgar Allen Poe's The Tell-Tale Heart beat for beat with only the character names changed
- Tracing over an image and presenting it as an original artwork.
- Purchasing an art sculpture, adding glitter, and pretending it's original.
- Buying a dish from a grocery store and claiming that they baked it.
- Stealing another student's video from YouTube and claiming they made it.
Indirect plagiarism is often referred to as "accidental plagiarism," as the context around the plagiarized material implies that the student isn't pretending the work is theirs, yet they do not give proper credit to the original author. For example, I've had students add a photo pages of their portfolio they found from the internet without telling where that photo came from. Other students have quoted a person to make a point without referring to where that quote originates from. Most cases of indirect plagiarism revolve around a student citing a fact or an outside idea without including accurate quotation markings or an in-text citation that shows where the information originated. Just because this is often accidental doesn't mean it's excusable; while teachers may be more forgiving of these mistakes as you are learning to write, direct and indirect plagiarism carry the same consequences at most educational institution.
Self-plagiarism is the most nebulous of the three. How can one even plagiarize themselves? Self-plagiarism occurs when a creator submits a previously created work as a new creation or submits a single creation for two different classes. Why is this bad? In academia, creative projects like stories and essays develop skills to improve or change the student. Say a student writes a Lord of the Flies essay freshman year and then uses the same essay again senior year. This violates the spirit of academia wherein student work should show off their current development.
- What if I'm rewriting a story I previously wrote? Rewriting a work doesn't count as self-plagiarism, as you are changing the work based on your current academic acumen. Novelist rewrite or revisit their old novels and stories all the time, though they always remark that they are the new edition of the text. Professors and essayists who focus on certain field also update old essays from time to time, yet they will refer to the old version of their work as if it were an outside source: the original text even gets quoted, cited in-text, and a works cited citation.
- So I can't submit the same story, essay, artwork, or film to more than one contest? This is a different case -- take independent films, which are submitted to several festivals in order to win awards and find a distributor. It's okay to send the story off to several contests within the same year, as it is an entry for that specific contest. For next year's contests, you should create a new work or completely rewrite your work.
- Could I turn in one project for two different classes if I'm currently in those class? It's not like I'm making it for one and then using it for the other: I'm making it for both. This makes sense, as investing twice the time on one project seems better than using it to make two projects. However, you must get permission from the teachers or professors of both classes to do this, especially if you are submitting writing. Most institutions run writing through a plagiarism checker that archives every writing previously submitted to it. If you use your essay a second time, it will register as plagiarism in the software, so it's important to talk to the two people grading you ahead of time so they won't hold this against you.