GRADING RUBRIC MUST BE FOLLOWED TO PASSNOTE Your writing prof.docx

GRADING RUBRIC MUST BE FOLLOWED TO PASS
NOTE: Your writing proficiency in your responses to all three
questions will be evaluated as a measure of your professional
communication. Responses must demonstrate your ability to
synthesize information appropriate to each business situation,
and presented in a clear, concise, and organized manner.
Supporting evidence must be drawn from reliable sources in the
literature and referenced using accurate APA Style.Include a
Title Page with your Exam ID number (no names).
Start a new page for each question (i.e., questions 1, 2 or 3).
Sub-questions (i.e., parts a, b, c, d) can begin on the same page
as the last sub-question completed).
Provide an introductory statement to each question and
summarize briefly the main points of the response in the
conclusion.
Use proper writing skills including: mechanics, usage, grammar,
and spelling.
Make sure to apply APA style conventions for citations,
quotations, references, headings, spacing, etc.
Include an APA formatted reference page(s) at the end of your
exam. (It is not necessary to include a separate reference page
at the end of each question.)
1. Provides a comprehensive evaluation of key issues and trends
caused by economic globalization. Analyzes the business and
financial impacts and recommends feasible and strategic
solutions that leverage the trends to meet sustained business
success.

2. Analyzes and prioritizes needs of diverse stakeholders from a
personal, social and corporate perspective. Evaluates business
situations to recommend feasible, ethical, and legal actions.
3. Synthesizes and clearly expresses the complexities in a given
business problem in a clear, concise, and logical manner.
Reflection, application, and analysis of business concepts are
presented in a succinct, systematic, and thorough manner well
supported by sound evidence and current research.
4. Comprehensive and extensive review of the literature from a
variety of appropriate sources, extracting the important
information and applying it in an in-depth response to the
business problem. Comprehensively analyzes a business
problem by gathering and assessing relevant information,
diagnosing underlying causes, considering and evaluating
possible alternatives, and determining and defending an
appropriate, well-reasoned solution or course of action.
Decisions show a high level of cultural sensitivity.
Question #1-Strategic Thinking (Rubric Items: 1, 3 and 4)
Business organizations come in all shapes and sizes as well as
legal structures. Normally the strategic purposes for the
business organizations are defined in their legal structures and
policies. What are the elements of fully stated general large
corporate missions, according to the literature on strategy
formulation and implementation? Once you have the proper
template of a full mission statement developed from the
literature, analyze the vision, mission and values of C-Corps, S-
Corps and B-Corps in a contrast-comparison among the three.
All three of these business organizations must balance profit
optimization with ethical business practices. So, in your
analysis describe and explain the challenges and facilitators of
each type of legal corporation as listed above. Then, decide on
which type of corporation might be established to perform best
in achieving the dual purposes of stockholder equity and

stakeholder fiduciary duties. Please explain your decision and
support it in solid peer-reviewed and relevant industry research.
Question #2-Divergent Thinking (Rubric Items: 1, 2, 3 and 4)
In financial management, marketing management and operations
management, ethical challenges exist faced by their respective
professionals in doing business in a global organization. Choose
from your DBA core one of the functional management
disciplines listed above, and then analyze the top five ethical
challenges faced by those professionals and how they assure
they can perform properly in a highly diverse and full-
globalized organization. Provide a real, recent example for such
an organization from industry journals and trade magazines.
Identify all affected stakeholders and their claims on the
organization and how those claims may challenge the global
organization to perform ethically. Suggest preferred courses of
action. Use theories and concepts from the academic literature
to support your recommendations.
Question #3-Informed Decision Making (Rubric Items: 1, 3 and
4)
Identify and describe an American company of your choice that
has taken a considerable loss in market share in a slow growth
market sector. The company must regroup and engage in a
retrenchment strategy that may or may not include possible
divestiture, spinoff, selected bankruptcy and/or liquidation.
Given its recent strategic actions that landed the organization in
a non-competitive position, given that it is cash poor and given
that the company stock has lost about 20% of its value, identify
the decision process it should go through to re-establish a
competitive position in the market and regain its original stock
value. Specifically, what strategy assessment tools might you
use to determine its market position and its strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities and threats, and what tools would you
use to decide on a new strategic direction? Please use those
tools to assess the organization’s situation and choices for
growth going forward. Use theories and concepts from the
academic literature to support your recommendations for the

organization’s new strategic plan.
Why the Technology, Education
and Copyright Harmonization Act
Matters to Librarians:
Two Cheers for the TEACH Act
Henry V. Carter
ABSTRACT. Librarians with an interest in electronic reserves
were, for
the most part, disappointed by The Technology, Education and
Copy-
right Harmonization Act (TEACH Act). The Act provided
classroom
instructors with relatively clear guidelines as how they could
use copy-
righted materials online classes without violating the law.
Mention of
libraries, however, was conspicuously absent and the Act
offered no
direct guidance for what sort of library materials could be
placed on
the Internet. The guidance it offers though is more indirect. It
gives some
sense of how the legislative branch views the rights and
responsibilities
of educators in the use of online materials. It will offer
guidance to
the judiciary when, inevitably, a copyright dispute involving
electronic re-
serves ever goes to court. It is important that librarians
understand the

TEACH Act and what it means to education, doi: tO.
1300/J474v 18nO t_06
[Article copies avaiiahle for a fee from The Haworth Document
Delivery Ser-
vice: 1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address: <[email protected]>
Wehsite: <littp://www.HaworthPress.com> © 2007 hy The
Haworth Press. All
rights reserved.]
Henry V. Carter is Library Specialist, Course Reserves
Department, Sterling C.
Evans Library, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
77845 (E-mail: [email protected]
tamu.edu).
Joumal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic
Reserve
Vol. 18(1)2007
Available online at http://jildd.hawortlipress.com
© 2007 by The Haworth Press. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1300/J474vl8nOI 06 49
50 Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Deliver)' &
Electronic Resen'e
KEYWORDS. TEACH Act, libraries, copyright, interlibrary
loan, docu-
ment delivery, electronic reserve, the Technology, Education
and Copy-
right Harmonization Act (TEACH Act)
THE INTENT OE THE TEACH ACT

The Technology, Education and Copyright Harmonization Act
(TEACH Act) was essentially an extension of Eair Use. It was
estab-
lished to help educators use copyrighted material in the digital
environ-
ment without the difficulty and expense of seeking permission.
For
educators who used the Internet as a teaching tool, this was a
welcome
development. Lawmakers had been slow to recognize how
digital tech-
nology had rendered existing copyright law obsolete. When they
did
take action, the primary beneficiaries had been content owners.
With
the TEACH Act, Congress had recognized the rights of
consumers as
well. Libraries, working with electronic reserves were
disappointed.
The TEACH Act fails to take into account the concet ns of
electronic
re.serve programs. It specifically ignores thetn. Still, there are
cotnpel-
ling reasons for those involved in electronic reserves to become
familiar
with the details of the TEACH Act. The Act clarifies and
reinforces
rights and privileges claimed by educators but never spelled out
in law.
The TEACH Act provides a better idea of the limitations of Fair
Use,
and what rights educational institutions have when reproducing
and
redistributing copyrighted material for class room use.

The impetus for the TEACH Act evolved from the growth in
distance
education. Lawmakers cited the needs of students in isolated
rural com-
munities. The true beneficiaries have been non-traditional
students. These
are mostly older individuals seeking post-graduate degrees to
augment
their skills or make a career change. The demographic indicates
that these
individuals tend to have career or family obligations that
traditional four
year college students do not (Jenkins and Downs, pp. 218-219).
They
do not have time to devote to travel, scheduled daytime class
periods and
library research during normal business hours. For them, the
ability to at-
tend lectures, participate in class discussions and access
assignments over
the Internet has made attaining a degree an easier and more
realistic op-
tion. At the same time, a new generation of undergraduates has
arrived
on campus. They have grown up with personal computers, the
Internet
and the World Wide Web as an integral part of their lives. They
are accus-
tomed to using these technologies as more than just research
tools, but as
a means of communication. This group also wants the
convenience and
Henry V. Carter 51

efficiency that online resources and twenty-four hour access
offered.
Many administrators and faculty also recognized the value of
online media
as a teaching and research tool.
THE BACKGROUND TO THE TEACH ACT
There are a number of obstacles. Many of them involve
technological
and legal issues. More traditional concerns, related to
implementation,
are costs and supporting resources. Once the initial startup costs
were
paid, universities must deal with regular operating expenses.
One of
these, often overlooked, expenses is seeking, and often paying,
for
copyright compliance. Not only paying the copyright holder, but
the
labor and time involved in finding, contacting the person or
corporation
to secure permission. For some schools, this represents the
single great-
est expense incurred for distance education programs. [Young,
p. A35,
also see Hafner, p. 1]. The only hope for educators is to seek, or
assume
an exception for the library from the burden of the regulations.
Fortu-
nately, there is a precedent for an exception.
The 1976 Copyright Act had given teachers in the classroom
certain
exemptions from restrictions on the use of copyrighted material.

The
instructor could screen a film, play music or read from a play
without
it being considered a "public performance." According to the
law, all
the Teach Act was required to do was to be able to, reasonably,
demon-
strate that the work was relevant to the course (previous law: 17
U.SC.
110(2) (A)). If the school had access to a closed circuit
television sys-
tem, material could be transmitted from one fixed location to
another,
provided it was not broadcasted over publicly accessible cable
channels
or the airwaves.
It was never clear if these privileges applied to the growing
number
of online or distance education courses in the digital
environment. Many
institutions assumed that it does without the necessary legal
support. The
1976 law did not envision or mention any technological change
beyond
the existing analog forms of transmission. The online classroom
is very
different from its physical counterpart. Students do not gather at
a fixed
place or time, instead visiting a website at a time convenient to
them and
staying as long as they wish. The various digital formats were
problem-
atic because some could be easily duplicated and distributed.
The legal climate has not been hospitable to consumers and

educa-
tional institutions of copyrighted material. Recent revisions to
the Copy-
right Law, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act [DMCA] and
the Sonny
52 Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery &
Electronic Reserve
Bono Copyright Extension Act, have favored the rights of
copyright
holders over users. As the Napster case demonstrated, copyright
holders
and publishers regard digital copying as far greater threat to
their profits
than other method of duplication (A&M Records Inc vs. Napster
Inc).
They demonstrated a willingness to take copyright disputes to
court,
and, thus far, have been quite successful. The targets of these
cases have
been profit-making entities and consumers rather than large
nonprofit
institutions. There are reasons to believe, and the historical
precedent
to support that belief, that the courts may treat nonprofits
differently, par-
ticularly educational institutions. This belief has not been
adequately
tested. It could ultimately come with definitive legal guidelines,
either
in the form of new statutes or of judicial decisions.
Historically, the Fair Use doctrine of the Copyright code [17

USC
504(c) (2)] has offered educators some protection, but
interpretation of
this statue has been both ambiguous and controversial. The
Conference
on Eair Use (CONFU) held in April 1997, between copyright
holders,
represented primarily by publishers, and users including
educators, rep-
resented an attempt by the concerned parties to negotiate terms
accept-
able to both sides without resorting to litigation. While common
ground
was established in some areas, there was no consensus on the
limits of
Fair Use where electronic reserve materials were concerned.
Some even
suggested that Fair Use did not apply to electronic media at all
(Crews,
p. 1343).
WHERE THE TEACH ACT HELPS
The TEACH Act has helped clarify some of these issues. The
law
was designed to give the instructor of an online course the same
basic
rights and privileges they would enjoy in the classroom. This
means that
an instructor can post a variety of materials to a website,
whether it is
textual, audio, and/or video, provided it is used for educational
pur-
poses. The instructor does not need to find and pay royalties to
the copy-
right holders every time they show their student a picture or

play music
over the Internet, they must abide by the restrictions also
written into the
law. The restrictions are:
• The course must be taught at an accredited, nonprofit
educational
institution.
• The institution must have a copyright policy in place.
Henry V. Carter 53
• The institution must make a reasonable effort make sure that
only
students registered for that elass have aeeess to the material.
• They canriot make unauthorized eopies.
• A notiee of eopyright must be attaehed to eaeh item.
• For a complete list of restrictions see Harper, p. 1.
The instructor must also be careful about what materials they
make
available. The amount of material must be "reasonable and
limited" and
should be no longer than would be used in a regular class
session. If
the material is unavailable in digital format, then the user is
permitted to
make a digital copy. If, however, a digital copy already exists,
the user
must make an effort to obtain access to that copy. Any material
that is
published specifically for distance education classes, must also

be pur-
chased and used according to the terms of the license which
usually re-
stricts any user copying and redistribution.
A careful reading of the law leaves those who deal with
electronic re-
serves feeling disappointed. Electronic reserve is not
specifically men-
tioned in the law, but it is mentioned explicitly in the Senate
report that
accompanies the TEACH Act, which clearly states that
lawmakers did
not intend to include Electronic Reserves programs, (Senate
Report
107-031, p. 10). While this passage does not have the force of
law, it is
possible that a judge could interpret the intent of the lawmakers
that
electronic reserve is a practice covered by the TEACH Act. A
Power-
Point slideshow that contains illustrations scanned from a book
would
qualify as legitimate under TEACH Aet ptovided it is of
sufficient
length that it could be viewed in a single class period. Music
can be
posted, as well as film clips, if they are of a "reasonable and
limited"
length. Most problematic is the insistence that material be of
the type
"comparable to that, which is typically displayed in the course
of a live
classroom session." Most material placed on electronic reserve
consists
of chapters from books and journal articles, not the sort of

material an
instructor would ask students to read during class. Those
working with
electronic reserves should continue to rely on Fair Use to guide
and jus-
tify their work.
WHA T LIBRARIANS CAN LEARN
FROM THE TEACH ACT
There are reasons to welcome the TEACH Act. Fair Use
guidelines re-
main ambiguous and controversial. The failure of CONFU to
establish
54 Journal of Interlihrary Loan, Document Delivery &
Electronic Resen>e
a tnutual agreement meant there is the danger that copyright
holders
might seek redress through the judicial process. This would be
done to
forestall the sympathetic leanings of the legislative branch since
they
have shown some sympathy for and support for the interests of
educa-
tional institutions.
Digital information is becoming more commonplace and
educational
institutions have demonstrated that digital tnedia can be used as
a teach-
ing tool in a manner similar to older and more established
formats. It is

now harder to claim that Fair Use does not apply to digital
media. The
TEACH Act also gives some guidance to educational users on
how to
respect and protect the interests of copyright owners. Even
though Li-
braries are not covered by the letter of the TEACH Act, it would
be pru-
dent to voluntarily follow the spirit of the restrictions it
mandates.
ESTABLISHING EFFECTIVE COPYRIGHT
G UIDELINES AND PRA CTICES
Institutions that do not have an up-to-date copyright policy
should
make development of a policy a priority. The Hbtary should
play an in-
tegral role in developing a policy because it faces copyright
issues on a
regular basis. It has a valuable and experienced perspective to
add to the
process. It must make sure that the interests of library users of
electronic
reserves are represented in the process.
If an institution has an up-to-date policy, staff involved in
electronic
reserves must be familiar with it, and make sure that they
operate within
its guidelines. It is also prudent for libraries to make certain
that faculty
tTtembers also understand this copyright policy in an active
way:
• Is the tnaterial online there only for a specific class?

• Does the posted material seems irrelevant to the subject of the
class?
• Does the amount of material seem excessive?
• The instructor must be able to explain why they need an item
or the
amount of a single item.
• Are items posted items frorn required textbooks or
workbooks?
What copyright holdet s fear the most is that libraries will cut
into their
profits.
It is critical to be aware of what is available in digital format.
Many
books are available in digital fomiat, and can be added to the
library's
Henry V. Carter . 55
collection. Thousands of journals and magazines are also
available in
both paper and online or exclusively online. They are
occasionally avail-
able free, but most are only available through a publisher's
subscription
or through a full text database. Terms of licensing are often
written to su-
persede copyright law. It is necessary to make sure that the
subscription
allows the necessary uses, like electronic reserves, as well as
for suffi-

cient access to archived back issues and allows for persistent
links. Tak-
ing this approach will generally avoid copyright questions in
addition to
saving the time and effort of scanning textual materials.
A crucial factor is to keep current with changing technology.
The
TEACH Act requires that users make reasonable efforts to
prevent un-
authorized individuals from accessing materials and anyone
from mak-
ing unauthorized copies. These are many software programs
available
that offer various degrees of security. Reasonable means a
system that
is sufficiently user-friendly for library staff and students to
operate as
well as being affordable. This could take the form of something
as sim-
ple as password protecting the course page, and asking students
not to
redistribute any downloaded material. There is no system that
cannot be
circumvented by a persistent individual with the right skills.
Copyright is still a thorny issue for those who administer
electronic
reserve programs, and the TEACH Act does little to change that.
Fair
Use, with all its vagaries, retnains the primary guide for
whether or not
to copy, or scan, needed material. After years of laws that favor
content
owners, it is gratifying to educators and librarians to see
Congress do

something to redress the balance. Weak as it is, the TEACH Act
does
offer some instruction and guidance as to how far one can go
before
they step over the line from responsible use of other people's
material
for educational purposes and exploitation of those people's
efforts. If a
library is involved in maintaining an electronic reserve system,
then
educating staff about copyright law is an essential task.
REFERENCES
Copyright Law 17 U.S.C. 101 etseq.
A&M RECORDS, INC. V. NAPSTER, INC. No. 00-
6401,2001U.S.App.LEXIS
194l(9thCir. Feb. 12,2001).
Digital millennium Copyright Act of 1998 112 stat.2860 (1998).
Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998, 112 Stat
2827 (1998).
Technology, Education, and Copyright Harmonization Act of
2002, Pub. L. No.
107-273, 116 Stat. 1758, Title III, Subtitle C, 13301.
56 Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Deliveiy &
Electronic Reserve
Crews, Kenneth D. "Electronic Reserves and Fair Use: The
Outer Limits of CONFU."
Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Dec
1999, Vol. 50 Issue

14, p. 1342-1345.
Harper, Georgia. TEACH Act Checklist
http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/scc/legislative/
. teachkit/checklist.html.
Hefner, Katie "Lessons Learned At Dot-Coni U". New York
Times, 5/2/2002, Vol.
151 Issue 52106, p E l , Op, Ic.
Jenkins, Stephen J, Downs, Elizabeth. "Demographic, Attitude,
and Personality Dif-
ferences Reported by Students Enrolled in Online Verses
Traditional Courses."
Psychological Reports; Aug. 2003, Vol. 93 Issue I, p. 213-221,
9p, 2 charts.
Young, Jeffrey R. "Pricing Shifts by Blackboard and WebCT
Cost Some Colleges Much
More." Chronicle of Higher Education, 4/19/2002, Vol. 48 Issue
32, pA35, 7/8p.
Senate Report 107-031.
Received: 08/06
Revised: 09/06
Accepted: 10/06
doi:10.1300/J474vl8n01 06

DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 479 254 IR 022 044
AUTHOR Alexander, Suann; Baird, Diane
TITLE The Wrinkle in Your Research and Teaching: Copyright,
DMCA,
Guidelines, and Public Domain.
PUB DATE 2003-04-00
NOTE 10p.; In: Teaching, Learning, & Technology: The
Challenge
Continues. Proceedings of the Annual Mid-South Instructional
Technology Conference (8th, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, March
30-April 1, 2003); see IR 022 027.
AVAILABLE FROM For full text: http://www.mtsu.edu/-
itconf/proceed03/
98.html/.
PUB TYPE Guides Non-Classroom (055) -- Reports Descriptive
(141)
Speeches/Meeting Papers (150)
EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MFO1 /PCO1 Plus Postage.
DESCRIPTORS *Copyrights; *Fair Use (Copyrights); *Federal
Legislation;
Federal Regulation; Higher Education ; International Law;
Reprography
IDENTIFIERS Berne Convention; Digital Millennium Copyright
Act 1998;

*Public Domain; World Intellectual Property Organization
ABSTRACT
This paper presents an overview of copyright issues for
research and teaching. The first section provides historical
background from
the origin of the concept of copyright in 1557 in Britain to the
present. The
second section looks at fair use, including parameters and
guidelines for
reproduction. The following sections discusses the Berne
Convention, the WIPO
(World Intellectual Property Organization) Copyright Treaty
Act, the DMCA
(Digital Millennium Copyright Act), the TEACH (Technology,
Education, and
Copyright Harmonization) Act, and the Sonny Bono Copyright
Term Extension Act
of 1998. The final section addresses public domain. (Contains
22 references.)
(MES)
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
from the original document.
4
The Wrinkle in your Research and Teaching:
Copyright, DMCA, Guidelines, and Public Domain
1
By: Suann Alexander & Diane Baird

PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND
DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS
BEEN GRANTED BY
R.C. Jones
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Office of Educational Research and Improvement
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION
CENTER (ERIC)
This document has been reproduced as
received from the person or organization
originating it.
Minor changes have been made to
improve reproduction quality.
Points of view or opinions stated in this
document do not necessarily represent
official OERI position or policy.
2 BEST COPY AVAILABLE
The Wrinkle in Irgur Research and Teaching: Copyright,
DMCA, Guidelines,...lic Domain I Mid-South Instructional
Technology Conference I 7th Annual

Eighth Annual
Mid-South Instructional Technology Conference
Teaching, Learning, & Technology
The Challenge Continues
March 30-April 1, 2003
2003 Conference Proceedings
The Wrinkle in Your Research and Teaching:
Copyright, DMCA, Guidelines, and Public Domain
By: Suann Alexander, Diane Baird
Track 4 - Policies, Standards, and Issues
Interest: General :: Lecture/Presentation :: Level: Beginner
Abstract
Iron out the wrinkle created by copyright! Information about
recent copyright legislation will equip you to
iron out those wrinkles that can affect your academic work.
Copyright is constantly changing in scope
and concept. Legal expertise is often the ultimate answer. But a
basic understanding of the historical
background, constitutional basis, some of the accepted
guidelines, current legislation, and the public
domain advocacy issue will help to avoid any problem wrinkles
that copyright might create in your
research and teaching.
Proceeding
Think about it. Everything is going smoothly with your research
paper, web page design, or class
preparation, when up pop the copyright questions. Can I use this

quote or this material without breaking
copyright law? How much of this material can I legitimately
photocopy for my class or put on Reserve?
Can I use the material from this web page, or put this music on
my web page? How does copyright
protect the material I have created? Copyright can certainly put
a wrinkle in the research, writing, and
class planning process that was going along so smoothly. And
new laws and guidelines are coming so
fast that you cannot keep up with all the new wrinkles that those
copyright laws create. You will either
have to learn to deal with copyright before it messes up your
nicely ironed research paper, or you will
have to learn to iron faster. Here is some information that will
hopefully help with all those wrinkles and
make your research, writing, and teaching a much smoother
process.
A Little History
Copyright is not a modern institution. The concept of copyright
began in Britain in 1557 to protect
intellectual property and was considered important enough to be
included in the Constitution of the
United States of America. The primary purpose of copyright,
according to the framers of the
constitution, is to "promote the progress of science and the
useful arts" (Article 1, Section 8) by giving
authors exclusive rights to their writings for a reasonable time.
It prevents persons other than the author
from profiting from the work.
Enacted in 1790, the first United States Copyright Act was a
close replica of an earlier English statute.
http://www.mtsu.eduHtconf/proceed03/98.html (1 of 9)

[4/16/2003 9:55:54 AM] 3
The Wrinkle in Your Research and Teaching: Copyright,
This act has had numerous revisions, including the major
revision act of 1976. The 1976 act has been
amended more than 30 times with many more changes expected.
Because of changes in law, science,
technology, and international relations it is necessary to amend
the copyright law to protect works not
previously covered and to comply with international treaties.
Since 1989, we have experienced at least
four major acts concerning intellectual property the Berne
Convention, the Copyright Term Extension
Act (Sonny Bono Act), the Digital Millennium Copyright Act
(DMCA), and the Technology, Education and
Copyright Harmonization Act (TEACH). Most changes were a
gradual effort to truly protect intellectual
property. However, it does not appear that these answer the
needs, so we can expect more changes in
the near future. All these factors have radically changed the
concept of intellectual property, creative
efforts, fair use, copyright, and public domain.
Fair Use
The Federal Convention of the United States established
copyright protection in the final draft of the
United States Constitution "To promote the Progress of Science
and the useful Arts, by securing for
limited Times, to Authors and Inventors, the exclusive Right to
their respective Writings and

Discoveries." Fourteen years was the time limit set in 1790 and
the limit has now been stretched to the
author's life plus 70 years. The Copyright Act of 1976 is the last
comprehensive copyright act passed by
Congress and is still in effect because it included inclusive
language that would not limit format or
technology. This act is one academia has dealt with successfully
because of the important
accompanying Fair Use doctrine or privilege (Section 107). The
1976 act truly implemented the
Constitutional goal of promoting progress of useful information
by allowing exceptions for educational
purposes even when faced with extension of exclusive rights.
The Founding Fathers realized the
importance of utilizing information as a foundation for growth
and expansion of creativity and science for
the benefit of all. The Fair Use privilege is unique because it
allows exception to copyright
exclusiveness and recourse for copyright holders and even
punishment for copyright infringement. It
does not define fair use in a quantitative aspect; any
infringement must be decided through legal action
on a case-by-case basis. Reproduction of copyright material
considered fair would be for criticism,
comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
Reproduction is set within parameters
outlined by four factors in Section 107 of Title 17, U.S. Code:
1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such
use is of commercial nature or is
for non-profit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work
3. amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to
the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of

the copyrighted work.
These factors have been utilized, quoted, promoted, reviled, and
bowed to since 1976 and many have
become inured of their importance. These factors are the
essence of using copyright material in
academia. They must be protected, utilized, adhered to, and
championed by academia. Copyright
protects the creative expression of the copyright holder; it does
not protect the ideas, systems, or factual
information conveyed or contained in the work. That is the basis
of fair use; allowing enough
reproduction to present the idea, system, or facts available
without compromising the creativity of
presentation. The Fair Use Act or Doctrine of Fair Use should
not need to be explained FAIR is the
operative word.
However there are many myths surrounding fair use. One of
these is that as long as it is for
educational purposes and you cite it, you can use as much of
someone else's work as is needed.
Remember, this is a myth. Since the Fair Use Act is qualitative
and not quantitative it only perpetuates
these myths. Because there is much confusion about what can
and cannot be reproduced many
associations have agreed on guidelines to help ease the way for
fair use of copyrighted material. Many
of these are available on-line for educational purposes from
kindergarten to space. In general,
reproduction of copyright material should be based on:
1.
Text: up to 10 percent or 1,000 words of a copyrighted text may
be used, an entire poem may be

http://www.mtsu.eduhitconf/proceed03/98.html (2 of 9)
[4/16/2003 9:55:54 AM] 4
The Wrinkle in Yrimr Research and Teaching: Copyright,
DMCA, Guidelines,...Iic Domain I Mid-South Instructional
used if it's less than 250 words; for longer poems, a limit of 250
words may be used, a chapter of a
book or one article in a journal could be use.
2. Music and lyrics: Up to 10 percent of a copyrighted
composition may be reproduced, but should be
limited to 30 seconds of an individual composition.
3. Visual images: A photograph or illustration may be used in
its entirety but no more than five
images by an individual artist or photographer. Up to 10 percent
or a limit of 15 images of a
collective work may be copied.
4. Films and videos: Up to 10 percent of a copyrighted work or
approximately three minutes may be
reproduced.
Remember, these are guidelines or suggestions and should not
be confused with legal descriptions.
Guidelines are the beginning point for consideration in
reproduction of copyrighted material. Fair use
compliance is always necessary and citing your source is always
advisable.
The Berne Convention

In 1886, the first major international convention on copyright
was held. The result of this convention was
an international treaty with standards for copyright protection.
The convention members include most of
the major industrialized countries of the world. However, the
United States did not become a member
until March of 1989 when it. became the 77th member country
to join the convention. The Berne
Convention protects the literary, artistic and scientific works of
members of the Convention in any of the
other member countries. Therefore, your creative work has the
same protection in most other countries
as it does here in the United States. The Convention also made
written notice or registration of works
first published after March 1, 1989 optional for basic copyright
protection in any of the Convention
member countries. From the moment you put your work in a
tangible form it is protected unless it was
published before the United States became a member in 1989.
However, you should register your
copyright for greater protection if you should ever have to bring
suit. Each country must offer a minimum
standard of copyright protection that includes: a time limit of
the author's life plus 50 years; a provision
for fair use of the copyrighted work; and the author's moral
rights to his/her work. The moral rights
clause protects the integrity of the copyright holder's work from
change or distortion without permission
and cannot be transferred to a third party.
The WIPO Treaty
In 1996, the United States signed the WIPO (World Intellectual
Property Organization) Copyright Treaty
Act that builds on the Berne Convention to include copyright

protection for digital works and computer
software. Under this international treaty, it would be an
infringement of copyright to make unauthorized
copies of material on a website or to remove or alter the
copyright owner's information from a digital
work. All the countries that signed the treaty are required to
enact copyright laws to protect work in
digital format. The United States amended its copyright law in
1998 to comply with this treaty. The
result was the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).
Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) was passed by
Congress on October 12, 1998. The
DMCA was signed into law by President Clinton on October 28,
1998 and conformed to the World
Intellectual Property Organization's efforts to provide a level
playing field for countries' treatment of
ownership and protection of intellectual property. The United
States is a major exporter of intellectual
property in various formats, print, software, music, and film. It
was imperative that U.S. law protect
American citizen's creative output for export as well as
protecting intellectual property imported into the
United States.
The issue of copyright in the digital environment is very
challenging to educators and librarians alike.
Technological developments force us to continuously re-
examine and re-apply our understanding of
intellectual property management. The DMCA is an effort to
balance the rights of copyright owners and
http://www.mtsu.edu/itconf/proceed03/98.html (3 of 9)
[4/16/2003 9:55:54 AM]

users in the digital environment. The availability of and easy
transmission of information has created an
atmosphere of skepticism and assertive protection of intellectual
property. The development of the
DMCA spanned five years from 1993 to 1998. The DMCA is
divided into five titles that address
numerous aspects of digital intellectual property.
Title I, WIPO Treaties Implementation.
Title II, Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation.
Title III, Computer Maintenance or Repair Copyright
Exemption.
Title IV, Miscellaneous Provisions
Title V, Protection Of Certain Original Designs
Title I establishes the DMCA as a globally effective protection
of U.S. citizen's intellectual property. It
provides legal protection against circumventing technological
protection measures and tampering with
copyright management information. It prohibits the
circumvention of any effective technological
protection measure installed to restrict access, be it password or
technology. Acceptable limitation for
circumvention is available for nonprofit library, archive and
educational institutions. This title also

includes language stating that nothing in the act affects fair use
or other information user privileges. The
activities of reverse engineering and encryption research are
limited by stated exceptions that must be
met to protect against copyright infringement. Title I places
very extreme penalties for copyright
infringement offenses.
Title II outlines protection for online service providers (OSP)
from copyright infringement liability. The
OSP is the institution, such as a library or university, providing
the connections for digital online
communication service. An OSP must meet certain conditions to
qualify for protection. When notified of
copyright infringement by copyright holders, the OSP must have
in place a method of terminating
service to subscribers who are repeat offenders. . The OSP is
not only the conduit for data information,
but also provides the copyright holder a point of complaint.
Title III allows an owner or lessee of a computer to make a copy
of a software program to maintain or
repair the computer. The software must be a lawfully obtained
program and the copy must be destroyed
after the repair or maintenance has been completed.
Title IV has several areas that impact educators and librarians.
It allows for nonprofit libraries and
archives to make up to three digital copies of copyright material
for preservation purposes as long as
they are not made available outside the archive or library. It
also allows making a digital copy of a work
into a new format if the original format is obsolete. Title V of
the DMCA has a minimum effect on
education and the academic arena, unless you are designing a
boat hull, and will not be discussed in

this paper.
The distance education aspect of the DMCA was woefully
inadequate, by design. Congress expressed
an interest in promoting distance education through legislation
and included in the DMCA a directive that
the Copyright Office conduct studies and report within six
months of DMCA enactment. The report
resulted in the Technology, Education, and Copyright
Harmonization Act (TEACH) that was passed by
Congress in October 2002 and was signed into law by President
Bush in November 2002.
Teach Act
The TEACH Act is an opportunity for distance education
providers because it allows accredited,
nonprofit educational institutions to utilize copyright protected
materials for distance education without
obtaining permission or paying royalties. The act outlines the
responsibilities, limitations and procedures
[4/16/2003 9:55:54 AM]
that must be observed for non-infringement of copyright.
Distance education is a vital and growing
aspect of most academic institutions and it behooves educators
to understand and utilize the TEACH
Act benefits for instruction in distance education. The basic

concept of traditional teaching is inherent in
the act, but it still provides potential for distance education to
utilize needed copyright materials.
Materials must be used within the context of "mediated
instructional activities", the expectation being
that students will access each session within a limited time
period. The time period will eliminate the
necessity to store or retrieve materials later during the academic
term. Faculty must also limit the
portion of copyrighted materials used, portions would be
comparable to that used in traditional
classroom instruction. The educational institution must provide
restricted access to the material
available in distance education courses, but may retain
restricted limited copies. The Teach Act is a
major improvement, but does have restrictions that faculty and
educational institutions must be aware
of. Educators should avail themselves of the benefits of the act
and explore methods to produce a
satisfactory atmosphere of learning. An imperative is the
application of the law of fair use.
The TEACH Act expanded the allowed works to include the
display and performance of nearly all types
of works. This usage is subject to quantity limitations,
reasonable and limited portions as outlined in the
act or fair use. This transmission should be a mediated
instructional activity supervised by the instructor
and related to the teaching content and limited to students
enrolled in the class. The TEACH Act does
not include transmission of supplemental materials that students
would be expected to utilize outside the
classroom. The Act expands the locations where the information
may be received; with limited access
distance education students can receive classes at any location.
Educational institutions have in the

past been allowed to record and retain copies of distance
education transmissions, this is still allowable,
but the time frame is limited, and should be used only for
transmission for distance education, and
placed in storage unavailable to students. If copyrighted
material is not available in digitized form, it
may be digitized in order to facilitate transmission. The Act
specifies that students should be notified
that materials included in distance education transmission may
be subject to copyright protection and
notification should be included on distribution materials for
class.
The passage of the TEACH Act is fairly recent and the true
impact on distance education, fair use, and
course construction is still being tested. In the coming months
there will be much commentary on the
act, and methods of utilizing the act, to accommodate the
process of instruction within the academic
arena.
The Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998
In October of 1998, Congress enacted the Sonny Bono
Copyright Term Extension Act. This act
essentially added twenty years to the term of copyright for all
works still under copyright at the date the
act went into effect as well as for future works. The following
table shows the basic duration of copyright
as it stands as of this time.
Copyright Duration Table
Date and Nature of Work
Published before 1923
Published 1923-1963 and never renewed

Published 1923-1963 with timely renewal
Published 1964-1977 (with © notice)
Created 1978 or later (published or not)
Created 1978 or later (anonymous/for hire)
Copyright Term
In the public domain
In the public domain
95 years from date of first publication
95 years from date of first publication
Life of author plus 70 years
95 years from publication or 120 years
from creation, whichever ends first
This act makes it more difficult to find works that are in the
public domain. There is one exception in the
act that impacts libraries, archives, and nonprofit educational
institutions. It allows these entities, not
individuals, to treat a copyrighted work that is in its last twenty
years of protection as if it is in the public
[4/16/2003 9:55:54 AM] 7
The Wrinkle in Yinir Research and Teaching: Copyright,
domain with certain restrictions.

1. It must be used for noncommercial or archival purposes only
2.
3.
A good faith search must determine that the work is not subject
to normal commercial
exploitation." Some sources explain this as the work not being
available for sale.
And that any use of the work would cease if the owner of the
copyright provides notice to the
contrary.
It is wise, anytime the boundaries of fair use are extended, to be
absolutely sure that the work is in the
public domain or that permission from the copyright holder is
given. The penalties for copyright
infringement, if brought to court, can be anywhere from $200 to
$150,000 and could include prison time.
PUBLIC DOMAIN
There is at present a cadre of legislators, educators, lawyers and
citizens that are questioning the
correctness of several aspects of current copyright provisions.
This reluctance toward the copyright
arena deals with the original intent of the U.S. Constitution
provision of limited exclusive rights and the
concept that copyright protects the creative process, not the
facts, of the copyright material and that
technology may inhibit the Fair Use provision The Sonny Bono
Copyright Extension Act has been
scrutinized against the intent of the U.S. Constitution and the
Supreme Court has upheld it. The

argument is that the Extension Act could be deemed
unconstitutional because it diminishes the
effectiveness of public domain. As things now stand, if an
author publishes at thirty and lives to sixty-
five years of age the copyright on his work could be effective
for more than one hundred years.
Compare this to the fourteen years allowed in the first copyright
law of 1790. Currently, there is
apprehension that copyright has been driven by economics
without regard to the benefits for society.
The DMCA provision for copyright through no circumvention
could inhibit the provision of fair use of
copyright materials. If you cannot access material because of
technological blocks you cannot invoke
fair use. In light of the fact that no laws or acts have impacted
the Fair Use Act this could present some
interesting legal questions. Fair Use infringement is determined
by legal proceedings and the language
of the aggressive protection of technological materials in the
DMCA is often not clear. Copyright is
determined on the aspect of originality and a tangible medium,
and when imposed on software the
concern is on the question of fact versus originality. The
concept of computer programs and databases
as literary works could be questioned. The new copyright laws
apply to limited areas of creative
endeavor, strongly favoring fine artists, software companies,
writers, movie producers and recording
artists. Often, writers, recording artists and software
programmers will contract with publishers or
companies to produce their work and so do not totally own the
rights to their creative product.
Academia is both producer and user of information and
dependent on intellectual property management
and policies. The current DMCA has not fully appreciated the

contributions of academic research and
intellectual property. Individuals supporting a better balance
between proprietary rights and information
access are aware of the contribution and utilization of academia.
Much research on campuses begins
with material that is, or at least should be, a part of public
domain. How the diminishing public domain
and the constriction of fair use will impact the acceptable
process of research is still being questioned.
Advocates of rewriting the DMCA and reversing the Extension
Act can paint a very depressing scenario
for the future, but any action should appreciate the need of
information providers and users.
CONCLUSION
Copyright does not need to impede academic research and
teaching. Copyright, ideally, is constructed
to balance the interests of copyright owners with the interest of
the users of copyrighted materials. The
Constitution of the United States provides a basis for the
concept of copyright and the advancement of
science and art. Fair Use is the vehicle that allows use of
copyrighted materials without infringement of
the law, but does not allow unlimited and flagrant violation of
Copyright Law. Technological and global
interests have added an element of copyright that must be
addressed for adherence to the laws of
[4/16/2003 9:55:54 AM]

copyright. Academic utilization of technology has enhanced
research, teaching, and information
delivery. This provides an exciting and creative atmosphere of
challenges. Changes in copyright
interpretation and laws are a challenge. The very technology
that drives these changes is also the tool
used to keep abreast of current trends. Access to Internet, Web
Pages, list serves, and e-mail are the
tools to understanding your rights to use copyrighted materials
for non-profit educational use. For all the
current activity toward copyright protection, nothing has
replaced the Copyright Law or Fair Use Act of
1976, they only complicate it.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Association of American Universities. Intellectual Property;
Federal Policies Must Balance User and
Producer Rights. AAU.
http://www.aau.edu/intellect/IntoPropTP.html. 1/9/2003
Band, Jonathan. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
America Library Association.
http://www.ala.org/washoff/band.html. 3/6/2003
Bollier, David. Silent Theft: The Private Plunder of Our
Common Wealth. New York: Routledge Press,
2002.
Crews, Kenneth D. Copyright Essentials for Librarians and
Educators. Chicago: American Library
Association, 2000.

Crews, Kenneth D. Copyright, Fair Use, and the Challenge For
Universities: Promoting The Progress of
Higher Education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993.
Crews, Kenneth D. The Technology, Education and Copyright
Harmonization (TEACH) Act: New
Copyright Law for Distance Education: The Meaning and
Importance of the TEACH Act. American
Library Association. http://vvww.ala.org/washoff/teach.html.
12/3/2002.
Fishman, Stephen. The Copyright Handbook: How to Protect
and Use Written Works. Berkeley, CA:
Nolo, 2001.
Gasaway, Laura N. and Sarah K. Wiant. Libraries and
Copyright: A Guide to Copyright Law in the
1990s. Washington, D.C.: Special Libraries Association, 1994.
Harper, Georgia. The TEACH Act Finally Becomes Law.
University of Texas.
http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualproperty/teachact.htm.
3/6/2003
Lessig, Laurence. The Future of Ideas: The Fate of the
Commons in a Connected World. New York:
Random House, 2001.
Litman, Jessica. Digital Copyright: Protecting Intellectual
Property on the Internet. Amherst, N.Y.:
Prometheus Books, 2001;
McLeod, Kembrew. Owning Culture: Authorship, Ownership, &
Intellectual Property Law. New York:
Lang, 2001.

National Research Council, Committee on Intellectual Property
Rights and the Emerging Information
Infrastructure. The Digital Dilemma: Intellectual Property in the
Information Age. Washington, D.C.:
National Academy Press. 2000.
9
[4/16/2003 9:55:54 AM]
Patterson, L. Ray and Stanley W. Lindberg. The Nature of
Copyright: Law of User's Rights. Athens:
University of Georgia Press, 1991.
Talab, R. S. Commonsense Copyright: A Guide for Educators
and Librarians. Jefferson, N.C.:
McFarland & Company, 1999.
U.S. Copyright Office. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act
of 1998; U.S. Copyright Office Summary.
http://loc.gov/copyright/legislation/dmca.pdf. 2/1/2003.
U.S. Copyright Office. Project Looking Forward: Sketching the
Future of Copyright in a Networked
World. Final Report (May 1998), by Professor I. Trotter Hardy.
Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress,
1998.
U.S. Copyright Office. Reproduction of Copyrighted Works by
Educators and Librarians. Washington,

D.C.: Library of Congress, 1992
Vaidhyanathan, Siva. Copyrights and Copywrongs: The Rise of
Intellectual Property and How It
Threatens Creativity. New York: New York University Press,
2001
Wherry, Timothy Lee. The Librarian's Guide to Intellectual
Property in the Digital Age.
Chicago: American Library Association, 2002.
I 0
http:// www. mtsu .edu /- itconf /proceed03 /98.html (8 of 9)
[4/16/2003 9:55:54 AM]
U.S. Department of Education
Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OEM)
National Library of Education (NLE)
Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC)
NOTICE,
Reproduction Basis
This document is covered by a signed "Reproduction Release
(Blanket)"
form (on file within the ERIC system), encompassing all or
classes of
documents from its source organization and, therefore, does not
require a
"Specific Document" Release form.

This document is Federally-funded, or carries its own
permission to
reproduce, or is otherwise in the public domain and, therefore,
may be
reproduced by ERIC without a signed Reproduction Release
form (either
"Specific Document" or "Blanket").
EFF-089 (1/2003)
57The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing · Vol 41, No
2, 2010
Earn 2.3 Contact Hours
cne
arTiClE
Open Access is Almost Here: Navigating
Through Copyright, Fair Use, and the TeACH Act
Margaret G. Lyons, MSN, CRNI
abstract
Dealing with the complexities of copyright, fair use, the
TEaCH act, and the concept of open access can confuse
even the most experienced educator. Online education has
added to the dilemma. This article discusses the latest infor-
mation on copyright issues, current guidelines for interpret-
ing fair use and incorporating the TEaCH act, and recent
developments in open access publishing.
J Contin Educ Nurs 2010;41(2):57-64.

Ms. Lyons is Program Coordinator for Continuing Education,
Vil-
lanova University College of Nursing, Villanova, Pennsylvania.
The author discloses that she has no significant financial
interests in
any product or class of products discussed directly or indirectly
in this
activity, including research support.
Address correspondence to Margaret G. Lyons, MSN, CRNI,
Pro-
gram Coordinator for Continuing Education, Villanova
University
College of Nursing, Driscoll Hall, 800 Lancaster Avenue,
Villanova,
PA 19085-1690.
doi:10.3928/00220124-20100126-03
Open access describes the concept of no-cost, no-wait, online
access to scholarly works. An open
access article has limited copyright and licensing restric-
tions, which means that anyone, anywhere, with access
to the Internet, may read, download, copy, and distrib-
ute that article (Suber, 2007). There are no user fees or
permissions—just click, copy, and transform, and any-
one can use materials for any purpose. “The only con-
straint on reproduction and distribution should be to
give authors control over the integrity of their work and
the right to be properly acknowledged and cited” (Open
Society Institute, 2002). Open access is the ideal that all
educators would like to see. The problem is that not all
research is available in an open access format.
TimeliNe TO OpeN ACCess

The timeline to open access (Sidebar 1) began with
the first copyright laws enacted in the 1700s (Associa-
tion of Research Libraries, n.d.). These laws had limited
HOW TO OBTAiN CONTACT HOUrs BY
reADiNG THis issUe
instructions: 2.3 contact hours will be awarded for this activity.
a
contact hour is 60 minutes of instruction. This is a learner-
paced
Program. Vindico Medical Education does not require
submission
of the quiz answers. a contact hour certificate will be awarded
4-6 weeks following receipt of your completed registration
Form,
including the Evaluation portion. To obtain contact hours:
1. read the article: “Open access is almost Here: Navigating
Through Copyright, Fair Use, and the TEaCH act,” on
pages 57-64, carefully noting the tables and other illustrative
materials that are provided to enhance your knowledge and
understanding of the content.
2. read each question and record your answers. after completing
all questions, compare your answers to those provided within
this issue.
3. Type or print your full name and address and your social
security
number in the spaces provided on the registration Form.
indicate
the total time spent on the activity (reading article and
completing
quiz). Forms and quizzes cannot be processed if this section

is incomplete. all participants are required by the accreditation
agency to attest to the time spent completing the activity.
4. Forward the completed registration Form with your check
or money order for $15 made payable to JCeN-CNe.
Payment must be in U.S. dollars drawn on a U.S. bank. CNE
registration Forms are accepted up to 24 months from date
of issue.
Vindico medical education is an approved provider of
continuing nursing education by the New Jersey state
Nurses Association, an accredited approver by the American
Nurses Credentialing Center’s Commission on Accreditation.
p188-6/09-12.
This activity is co-provided by Vindico Medical Education and
The
Journal of ConTinuing eduCaTion in nursing.
Objectives: after studying the article, “Open access is almost
Here: Navigating Through Copyright, Fair Use, and the TEaCH
act,” in this issue, the participant will:
1. Explain key points related to copyright, fair use, Digital
Millennium Copyright act legislation, and the TEaCH act.
2. Discuss the concept of open access publishing.
3. identify strategies for correctly using copyrighted materials
in
the development of online or classroom materials.
58 Copyright © SlaCK incorporated

cne
arTiClE
time restrictions for copyright and later required the use
of the copyright symbol and a renewal process to re-
tain copyright (Association of Research Libraries, n.d.).
These laws were followed by the Copyright Act of 1976,
also called Title 17 of the U.S. Code. Within that code is
Section 107, which discusses a concept called “fair use.”
This code, which is still in effect today, has been modi-
fied. In the early 1990s, the World Wide Web became a
part of everyday lives and teaching formats. Questions
began to arise about copyright and the web. In 1994, as a
part of the U.S. government’s National Information In-
frastructure Initiative, interested parties from industry,
academia, and libraries formed a working group to nego-
tiate guidelines for the fair use of copyrighted electronic
content in nonprofit educational environments (Associ-
ation of Research Libraries, n.d.). This group had a series
of meetings that came to be known as the “conference on
fair use” (CONFU) and in 1996 agreed on “multimedia
fair use guidelines” (Lehman, 1998). In 1998, the Digi-
tal Millennium Copyright Act was passed in response to
new treaties adopted by the World Intellectual Property
Organization (Association of Research Libraries, n.d.).
In an effort to decrease confusion, the TEACH Act of
2002 was developed. More recently, the Prioritizing Re-
sources and Organization for the Intellectual Property
Act of 2008 (PRO-IP Act) provided additional amend-
ments to U.S. copyright laws. The PRO-IP Act impos-
es stiffer fines for those who engage in Internet piracy
(Udell & Pressman, 2008).
WHAT is COpYriGHT?

Copyright is Title 17 of the U.S. Code and gives le-
gal protection to a person who creates a fixed work. This
work can be musical, artistic, performed (i.e., dance), or
written (U.S. Copyright Office, n.d.). Creators of these
works are entitled to exclusive rights, such as the right
to display, perform, transmit, and copy their own work
and prepare new works based on the original work (de-
rivative works) (Stim, 2007). This law was created to give
authors time to benefit from the revenue that the artistic
work generated so that they would be able to keep creat-
ing future work. Copyright falls under the umbrella of
U.S. Intellectual Property Law. Copyright today is auto-
matically applied when a work is created and “fixed in a
copy,” even if it does not mention the word “copyright”
or use the copyright symbol (©) (Stim, 2007). There was
a brief time when works needed to be registered with the
copyright office to renew a copyright. This is not the case
today. A small fee of $45.00 is all that is needed to register
with the copyright office to have the author named as the
original author of a work (U.S. Copyright Office, n.d.).
However, copyright does not need to be registered to
retain the author’s rights (Kelly, 2006). Registering with
the copyright office strengthens the author’s position if
someone is challenging the author as the original creator
of the work. The bottom line for all educators is to as-
sume that everything is copyrighted unless noted other-
wise.
The original length of copyright was 14 years, with a
renewal option for another 14 years (Association of Re-
search Libraries, n.d.). After that time, the work would
be released to the public. Today copyright lasts for the
lifetime of the author plus 70 years, after the implemen-
tation of the Copyright Term Extension Act, otherwise

known as the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension
Act of 1998 (U.S. Copyright Office, n.d.). Any work
created before 1923 is open to the public.
There is no such entity as the “copyright police.” To
determine culpability, those who violate copyright laws
must be sued, and the court makes a judgment. The
minimum fine is $750 per infringement (whether done
intentionally or not). Willful violators can be fined up to
$250,000.00 per infringement. A prison sentence can be
included for up to 5 years, as per the PRO-IP Act (Udell
& Pressman, 2008).
There are some exceptions to copyright, such as ideas,
short phases, and common knowledge. Slogans can be
protected under trademark laws (Stim, 2007). Works that
are in the public domain are also exempt from copyright
law (Stim, 2007).
pUBliC DOmAiN
Works in the public domain (Sidebar 2) include a range
of abstract materials that are not owned or controlled
by anyone (Stim, 2007). This designation indicates that
these materials are considered “public property” and are
available for anyone to use for any purpose. “Of all the
books found in the world’s libraries, it is estimated that
currently, only about 15 percent are in the public do-
SiDEbar 1
TimeliNe FOr OpeN ACCess
1700s U.S. copyright laws enacted
1976 Copyright act (Title 17, U.S. Code, Section 107, Fair
Use)

1994 to 1996 Conference on Fair Use
1998 Copyright Term Extension act (Sonny bono Copyright
Term Extension act)
1998 Digital Millennium Copyright act
2002 Technology, Education, and Copyright Harmonization
act
2008 Prioritizing resources and Organization for the intel-
lectual Property act of 2008
? Open access legislation
2, 2010
cne
arTiClE
main. Only 10 percent of all books are still in print; the
remaining 75 percent are books which remain unavail-
able because they are still under copyright protection”
(Kelly, 2006).
A website (www.librarycopyright.net/digitalslider) can
be used to determine a work’s copyright protection status
quickly by sliding the red arrow to the date of the work
in question. A yes, no, or maybe answer will be provided,
with the option of clicking on additional information that

links to key copyright websites (Sidebar 2).
FAir Use
Another exemption to copyright in certain circum-
stances is discussed in Sections 107-121 of Title 17. Section
107 relates to the concept of fair use (Sidebar 3). Fair use
is a legal principle that provides certain limitations on the
exclusive rights of copyright holders. Fair use is not a spe-
cific law that exempts a person from copyright infringe-
ment; rather it is a legally defensible position if copyright-
ed materials are used without the holder’s permission.
The language and criteria for determining fair use are
deliberately vague. The idea is for a court to determine
whether an infringement has occurred. Each of four fac-
tors must be considered when deciding whether to use
copyrighted materials (Sidebar 3).
First Factor
The literature notes that courts have upheld the first
factor as the primary indicator of fair use: the purpose
of the work, meaning what is the work being used for?
Nonprofit educational purposes versus commercial ven-
tures would favor fair use (Stim, 2007).
second Factor
What is the nature of the work? Is it published or un-
published? Using unpublished works is less likely to be
seen as fair use. Is the work factual or artistic? The more
a work leans toward factual expression, the more likely it
is that the use would be judged as fair (Stim, 2007). This
factor can come into play when an educator thinks about

adding music or a cartoon to instructional materials ver-
sus a factual chart from a scientific journal.
Third Factor
The third factor that is considered is the amount of the
work that is used. Less is best; it is important to avoid us-
ing the heart of an author’s work if economic gain could
be affected (Stim, 2007).
Fourth Factor
The last factor is the use of the copyrighted work
on the potential market. Will the copyright holder lose
money from the use of the work? If the answer is yes,
then the use may not be fair.
Fifth Factor
Some of the literature refers to a “fifth factor” for de-
termining fair use—good faith. Consideration is given if
efforts were made to obtain permission and if the pro-
posed uses are deemed “honorable.” This consideration
has come about because in studying court cases, judges
tended to favor fair use if the user made attempts to con-
tact authors or cited their source and used the works for
efforts seen as worthy or honorable (i.e., educational as
opposed to entertainment) (Copyright Website, Field vs.
Google, n.d.).
SiDEbar 2
FOUr WAYs FOr WOrks TO eNTer THe
pUBliC DOmAiN
Copyright expired: illustrations from Gray’s Anatomy are

old enough to enter the public domain because they were
published before 1923.
Owner failed to follow copyright rules: Owner did not renew
copyright during the right time frame.
Dedication: author deliberately placed the work in the public
domain (e.g., Flickr, Creative Commons).
Work was not protected by copyright: Federal government
work and laws are examples. However, work created by
state workers is subject to copyright protection.
Note. Data adapted from Stim (2007).
SiDEbar 3
FAir Use
The exact quote from section 107 is:
“Fair use of copyrighted work, including such use by repro-
duction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means
specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism,
comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple cop-
ies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an
infringement of copyright.
in determining whether the use made of a work in any par-
ticular case is ‘fair use,’ the factors to be considered shall
include:
The purpose and character of the use, including whether
such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educa-
tional purposes;
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.”
Note. Data from U.S. Copyright Office (n.d.).
cne
arTiClE
Provisions of the law are still at best vague. These
laws were written in 1976. As technology grew, educa-
tors wanted clear guidelines to determine fair use in the
educational setting. This led to the Conference on Fair
Use (CONFU).
CONFereNCe ON FAir Use
On November 18, 1996, the Working Group on Intel-
lectual Property Rights in the Electronic Environment
convened at the CONFU to work with copyright owners
who wished to participate in the development of fair use
guidelines for electronic multimedia in certain nonprofit
educational settings (Lehman, 1998). The CONFU met
for 2 years and did not reach a consensus or adopt official
guidelines. However, it did provide a model for many in-
stitutions to use in developing their own guidelines. Al-
though the CONFU guidelines do not carry the weight

of law, many people support them as “reasonable” mea-
sures to protect the rights of copyright owners while
also advancing nonprofit educational efforts through
multimedia (Lehman, 1998). These guidelines, known
as “Fair Use Guidelines for Educational Multimedia”
or “the Guidelines,” are not laws and were intended to
reflect the minimum amount of material that could be
used without getting into legal difficulty. The CONFU
guidelines were endorsed by the American Association
of Community Colleges; the Society of Journalists and
Authors; the American Society of Composers, Authors
and Publishers; the United States Copyright Office; Mc-
Graw-Hill and Time Warner; and others (Lehman, 1998)
(Sidebar 4).
These guidelines finally provided educators with
clear-cut “rules” about copying. Unfortunately, follow-
ing the rules can be restrictive and also requires measur-
ing and counting numbers of letters. The guidelines re-
fer to teaching in the classroom setting, leaving distance
learning and online instruction in states of continued
confusion.
DiGiTAl milleNNiUm COpYriGHT ACT
The CONFU was followed by the Digital Millen-
nium Copyright Act, a U.S. Copyright Law that imple-
ments two 1996 treaties of the World Intellectual Prop-
erty Organization. Its main focus is Internet piracy and
other crimes. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act
heightens the penalties for Internet copyright infringe-
ment. It attempted to include distance learning language
in the copyright law (http://hrrc.org/File/H.R._2281-
_final_text.pdf). Section 110 refers to classroom activi-
ties, but was changed to include a broadened definition

of classroom. It clarified the meaning of educational
transmissions and redefined teaching activities within a
course (http://hrrc.org/File/H.R._2281-_final_text.pdf).
Section 107 on fair use remained unchanged because
the courts believed that the language was “technology
neutral.” Unfortunately, this law still left educators con-
fused about copyright violation, especially in the areas of
online and distance learning.
TeACH ACT
The TEACH Act (Technology, Education, and Copy-
right Harmonization Act), was passed on November 2,
2002. This act essentially revised Sections 110(2) and 112
of the existing copyright law that governs the conditions
under which accredited nonprofit educational institu-
tions in the United States may use copyrighted materials
without permission from the copyright owner and with-
out payment of royalties (Gasaway, 2001).
Language was added to Section 110 that allows the
use of a multitude of works as long as certain criteria are
met (Sidebar 5). First and foremost, the institution must
be an accredited nonprofit educational institution, which
would include K-12 schools, colleges, universities, teach-
ing hospitals, and certain continuing nursing education
providers. Then, the accredited nonprofit educational
institution must have formal policies that govern the use
of copyrighted materials (Gasaway, 2001).
Once the accreditation and institutional require-
ments are met, the faculty/student criteria would be
applied to the development of any educational project
(Copyright Management Center, 2008). For example,
when creating online continuing education modules,
the first criterion to consider is the amount of content

to be provided. Is it comparable to the amount of con-
tent shown during a “live” classroom session or “trans-
SiDEbar 4
FAir Use GUiDeliNes FOr eDUCATiONAl
mUlTimeDiA (“THe GUiDeliNes”)
Portions of works can be used for instructional activities at
educational institutions if:
The network is secure, and only for 2 years.
You make exactly two copies of the work, one for yourself and
one for an archive.
Movies: 10% or 3 minutes.
Text: 10% or 1,000 words.
Poems: less than 250 words.
Music, lyrics, and videos: 10% or 30 seconds.
illustrations or photos: no more than 5 per author or 10% or
15 images from a collection.
Numerical data: 10% or 2,500 cell entries
Note. Data from lehman (1998).
2, 2010

cne
arTiClE
mission”? If the answer is yes, criteria a, b, c, and d
are applied. Is the course content delivered under the
direction of an instructor (criterion a)? In the example
of the online module, the answer is yes if each mod-
ule is taught by a faculty member or content expert to
supervise the learning. Is the work directly related to
the content of the transmission (criterion b)? The nurse
planner or role equivalent should review each module
and speak to the presenter if there is a question about
the relationship of copyrighted material to the course
content (usually cartoons and certain photographs are
potential violators). Is the copyrighted material avail-
able to participants for a limited time (criterion c)? In
the online module example, the Blackboard teaching
platform that is used is password-protected. The par-
ticipants have access to the materials for 2 months, and
modules have a 2-year expiration date. Does the insti-
tution have policies on copyright and actively promote
compliance (criterion d)? In this case, the website has
clear policies on the home page and posted copyright
notices on every module. The author even saved a copy
of a local newspaper article written about the ways
that her institution enforces student compliance with
its copyright policies. An instructor who can answer
yes to all of the TEACH Act criteria questions can feel
confident in invoking the TEACH Act if questioned
about the use of a copyrighted item.
Under the TEACH Act, it is much easier to decide
what is legal to use and what is not legal to use (Sidebar
6). Materials that are not permitted to be used without

permission are items from digital textbooks and course
packs, electronic reserves, and unlawfully acquired cop-
ies (Crews, 2003). These are all materials that could take
money away from the people who created the materials
and thus potentially impair their ability to create future
educational works. Content that a student would nor-
mally have to purchase, such as cardiopulmonary re-
suscitation certification materials, should not be placed
in educational materials without permission, unless the
publisher’s license includes online use. Works that are
allowed under the TEACH Act include nondramatic
literary or musical works, including poetry, short story
readings, and all other music except opera; still images;
and reasonable portions of other works (Crews, 2003).
“Reasonable portions” of other works can be difficult
to define. Some educators have chosen to apply the 1996
CONFU guidelines. According to the Medical Library
Association’s 2007 publication Copyright Law and the
Health Sciences Librarian, still images and reasonable
portions of works are defined as amounts that would be
used in a normal classroom setting. Regardless of copy-
right status, all works must be cited in the reference sec-
tion, where the creator of the work (author or photogra-
pher) receives credit.
Although this act is not a blanket statement allowing
the use of copyrighted materials, it is reassuring that edu-
cators can use certain works without breaking the law. The
language in the TEACH Act essentially spreads liability
for infringements among the educational organization,
the instructor, and the participants enrolled in a course.
prOGress OF THe OpeN ACCess mOVemeNT
The timeline (Sidebar 7) shows that the open access

movement is a global initiative. The general concept of
SiDEbar 5
TeACH ACT CriTeriA
institutional criteria
• Has policies that govern the use of copyrighted materials.
• Distributes accurate information on copyright to faculty and
students.
• Promotes compliance with copyright law.
• Provides students or participants with notice that materials
may be covered under copyright law.
Faculty and student criteria
• amount used is comparable to a usual live session.
• Content is delivered under the direction of an instructor.
• Works used are directly related to the course topic.
• Works are made available only to students enrolled in the
course for a limited time.
• Faculty and students must demonstrate compliance with
institutional copyright policies.
Note. These criteria apply only to accredited, nonprofit,
educational
institutions. Data adapted from Copyright Management Center
(2008)

and Gasaway (2001).
SiDEbar 6
WOrks THAT Are permiTTeD AND NOT
permiTTeD UNDer THe TeACH ACT
permitted under the TeACH Act
• Nondramatic literary or musical works, including poetry,
short story readings, and all other music except opera.
• Still images.
• reasonable portions of other works.
Not permitted under the TeACH Act
• Digital media designed to be sold for use in a classroom
setting through mediated instruction (textbooks and course
packs).
• Electronic reserve supplemental reading.
• Unlawfully acquired copies.
Note. Data adapted from Crews (2003).
cne
arTiClE

open access provides free online access to full-text, peer-
reviewed journal articles arising from taxpayer-funded
research. In 2002 and 2003, nations began to draft state-
ments embracing the benefits of open access. DAREnet
(Digital Academic Repositories), launched in the Neth-
erlands, is a website that facilitates free access to scientific
research. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the
largest funder of medical research in the world and the
largest funder of nonclassified research in the U.S. fed-
eral government (NIH, 2009). Its budget for fiscal year
2009 is approximately $30 billion (NIH, 2009). NIH
now asks every scientist who receives an NIH research
grant and publishes the results in a peer-reviewed journal
to deposit a digital copy of the article in the PubMed
Central depository, the online digital library maintained
by the NIH. PubMed Central will then provide free on-
line access to its copy at some point after the article is
published in a journal, with the length of the delay deter-
mined by the author (NIH, 2008).
In April 2008, “in a move to disseminate Harvard fac-
ulty research and scholarship more broadly, the Faculty
of Arts and Sciences voted in 2008 to give the Univer-
sity a worldwide license to make each faculty member’s
scholarly articles available and to exercise the copyright
in the articles, provided that the articles are not sold for
a profit” (de Rosnay, 2008).
The Howard Hughes Medical Institute also an-
nounced that it will require its scientists to publish
their original research articles in scientific journals that
allow the articles and supplementary materials to be
made freely accessible in a public repository within 6
months of publication (Howard Hughes Medical Insti-
tute, 2007). On May 2, 2006, Senators John Cornyn and

Joe Lieberman introduced the Federal Research Public
Access Act of 2006 in the U.S. Senate. This act would
mandate open access to most federally funded research
(Albanese, 2009) and was reintroduced to the U.S. Sen-
ate in 2009. An opposing bill called “Fair Copyright in
Research Works Act” (HR801) attempted to prohibit
initiatives such as the Howard Hughes Medical Institute
mandate, citing its unfairness to publishing companies
(Albanese, 2009).
OpeN ACCess WeBsiTes
Sidebar 8 shows examples of open access websites.
Users need to check their policies on use and citation.
Creative Commons, founded by Stanford University
Law School professor Larry Lessig, provides a search-
able database for items in the public domain that are
freely available for noncommercial use, if the author is
given credit. Flickr is a database of photography. The di-
rectory of open access journals can be used to determine
which journals are open and when certain issues will be
SiDEbar 7
exAmples OF WOrlDWiDe OpeN ACCess
iNiTiATiVes
2002 budapest Open access initiative
2003 bethesda Statement on Open access Publishing
2003 berlin Declaration on Open access Knowledge in Sci-
ence and Humanities
2005 DarEnet (Digital academic repositories website

started in the Netherlands)
2005 National institutes of Health Public access Policy
2006 Federal research Public access act
2007 Howard Hughes Medical institute Open access Man-
date
2009 reintroduction of the Federal research Public access
act
SiDEbar 8
OpeN ACCess WeBsiTe iNiTiATiVes
Creative Commons (www.creativecommons.org): Nonprofit
corporation dedicated to making it easier for people to share
and build on the work of others, consistent with the rules
of copyright. The site provides free licenses and other legal
tools to mark creative work with the freedom the creator
wants it to carry, so that others can share the material,
remix it, use it commercially, or any combination thereof.
Flickr (www.flickr.com): Online photo management and shar-
ing application website where many users have chosen to
offer their work under a Creative Commons license.
Wikipedia (www.wikipedia.org): Multilingual, web-based, free-
content encyclopedia project.
Teachertube (www.teachertube.com): Website designed for
teachers to provide an online community for sharing instruc-
tional videos.
Disease database (www.diseasedatabase.com): information

on diseases, symptoms, physical signs, nonbrand drugs,
and common laboratory abnormalities in conjunction with
the U.S. National library of Medicine.
SciVee (www.SciVee.com): Public website that provides rich
media solutions to the scientific, technical, and medical
market and is open for users to access and researchers
to upload videos of interest, with a distribution option for
publishers and other content providers.
Open access Directory (www.oad.simmons.edu): Wiki
(website allowing input by users) where the open access
community can create and support simple factual lists about
open access for science and scholarship.
Directory of Open access Journals (www.DOaJ.org): list of
open access journals (i.e., scientific and scholarly journals
that meet high quality standards by exercising peer review
or editorial quality control and are free to all from the time of
publication, based on the budapest Open access initiative
definition of open access).
PubMed Central (www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov): U.S. National
institutes of Health free digital archive of biomedical and life
sciences journal literature.
2, 2010
cne
arTiClE

opened to the public (usually after a 6-month waiting
period). Peter Suber of Earlham.edu maintains a website
related to all things open access.
AVAilABle TOOls
Sidebar 9 shows examples of tools to use when mak-
ing decisions about the use of copyrighted materials.
The Benedict tool on the Association for the Protec-
tion of Internet Copyright website provides a fair use
checklist similar to the Indiana University site’s Check-
list for Fair Use, but weights the fair use criteria (1 =
35%, 2 = 10%, 3 = 10%, and 4 = 35%) and calculates a
percentage (50% or greater favors fair use). The Stan-
ford University website also provides useful tools to
help with copyright and fair use decisions. This website
includes tools from different universities, such as Duke
University and Baruch College. The Baruch College ex-
ample offers an interactive journey on the “copyright
metro” while learning about copyright issues.
Caution must be used when investigating websites.
Several keep CONFU guidelines as their state-of-the-
art policies on copyright. Others have not incorporated
TEACH Act legislation. Website information should be
dated since at least 2002.
Until there is an absolute, clear, and concrete way to
determine fair use, or until all fixed items have some kind
of label (e.g., “oa” or “o” to indicate open access), the as-
sumption must be made that everything is copyrighted.
Using these strategies can minimize exposure to poten-
tial copyright infringement.

CONClUsiON
The goal for educators is open access, and open access
is getting closer. Pending legislation as well as the grow-
ing debate by young people in the creative arts areas of
music remixing and video works will likely lead to spe-
cific laws regarding transformative creations. It is best
to remember that each case is different and that there
are no clear-cut rules to avoid legal issues. However, by
being aware of the copyright laws and developing con-
tent within best practices recommendations, educators
should be able to provide creative multimedia presenta-
SiDEbar 9
AVAilABle TOOls
• North Carolina State University Teach act Toolkit
• University of Texas Copyright Crash Course and UT rules of
Thumb System Guidelines available at http://www.utsystem.
edu/ogc/intellectualproperty/teachact.htm
• indiana University Checklist for Fair Use
• association for the Protection of internet Copyright fair use
visualizer and fair use algorithm available at www.benedict.
com/info/FairUse/Visualizer/Visualizer.aspx
• Stanford University website
• Duke University Teach act Flow Chart
• baruch University Copyright Metro available at
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/charts_tools

Best practices
• Check institutional copyright policies to see if you comply
with the TEaCH act criteria.
• Know and apply fair use criteria and Conference on Fair
Use guidelines within the confines of the TEaCH act.
• Use works in the public domain (http://www.librarycopyright.
net/digitalslider).
• Use open access websites.
• include all copyrighted items used to create a paper or proj-
ect in the bibliography. For example, cite books, newspaper
articles, internet pages, images, and multimedia information
included in the project.
• Try to obtain permission, especially for enduring materials.
Web resources
• For-profit photography usage
www.Stockasylum.com
• Copyright law
www.Copyright.gov
• all things government
www.USa.gov
• Health topics from trusted sources

www.Healthfinder.gov
• Copyright website
www.benedict.com
• U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
www.NiH.gov
• american library association
www.ala.org
key points
Open Access
lyons, M. G. (2010). Open Access is Almost Here: Navigating
Through Copyright, Fair Use, and the TeACH Act. The Journal
of Continuing Education in Nursing, 41(2), 57-64.
1 Teaching in the new millennium is complex and most educa-
tors are not sure about copyright issues.
2 Educators can use copyrighted materials both on campus and
in online classrooms if they know the parameters or con-
straints of “Fair Use” and the TEaCH act.
3 Open access publishing should make copying of educational
materials easier for educators, and it is important for educa-
tors to become familiar with open access initiatives.

cne
arTiClE
tions without the worry of legal trouble. Open access is
almost here!
reFereNCes
Albanese, A. R. (2009, July 2). Federal Research Public Access
Act (FR-
PAA) reintroduced in Senate. Retrieved from
www.libraryjournal.
com/article/CA6668699.html?nid=2673&source=title&rid=1999
3
95792
Association of Research Libraries. (n.d.). Copyright timeline: A
history
of copyright in the United States. Retrieved from
www.arl.org/pp/
ppcopyright/copyresources/copytimeline.shtml
Copyright Management Center. (2008). Checklist for
compliance
with the TEACH Act. Retrieved from www.copyright.iupui.edu/
teachlist.htm
Copyright Website. (n.d.). Copyright casebook: Field vs.
Google. Re-
trieved from
www.benedict.com/Digital/Internet/Field/Field.aspx
Crews, K. D. (2003). Copyright and distance education: Making
sense
of the TEACH Act. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning,

35(6), 34-39.
de Rosnay, M. (2008, February 13). Harvard goes open access.
Re-
trieved from http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/node/3462
Gasaway, L. N. (2001). Balancing copyright concerns: The
TEACH Act
of 2001. Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/lr/library/pdf/
ERM01610.pdf
Howard Hughes Medical Institute. (2007, August 20). Biomed
Cen-
tral announces open access publishing agreement with HHMI.
Re-
trieved from www.hhmi.org/news/bmc20070820.html
Kelly, K. (2006, May 14). Scan this book! Retrieved from www.
nytimes.com/2006/05/14/magazine/14publishing.html?ex=13052
5
9200en=c07443d368771bb8ei=5090&pagewanted=all
Lehman, B. (1998). The conference on fair use: Final report to
the com-
missioner on the conclusion of the conference on fair use.
Retrieved
from www.uspto.gov/web/offices/dcom/olia/confu/confurep.pdf
Medical Library Association. (2007). The copyright law and the
health
sciences librarian. Chicago: Medical Library Association.
National Institutes of Health. (2008, September 23). Reminder
con-
cerning grantee compliance with public access policy and

related
NIH monitoring activities. Retrieved from http://grants.nih.gov/
grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-08-119.html
National Institutes of Health. (2009, June 11). NIH budget.
Retrieved
from www.nih.gov/about/budget.htm
Open Society Institute. (2002). Budapest open access initiative.
Re-
trieved from www.soros.org/openaccess
Stim, R. (2007). Getting permission. Berkeley, CA: Nolo.
Suber, P. (2007). Open access overview. Retrieved from
www.earlham.
edu/~peters/fos/overview.htm
Udell, R., & Pressman, S. (2008). To intellectual property, with
love.
Retrieved from
www.whiteandwilliams.com/CM/NewsAlerts/To-
Intellectual-Property-With-Love.asp
U.S. Copyright Office. (n.d.). Copyright law of the United
States and
related laws contained within Title 17 of the United States
Code.
Retrieved from www.copyright.gov/title17
Copyright of Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing is the
property of SLACK Incorporated and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted

to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.
5/5/2016 Emerging Education Technologies » Understanding
Copyright, Fair Use, and Creative Commons, as they apply to
Education » Print
http://www.emergingedtech.com/2010/10/understanding-
copyright-fair-use-and-creative-commons-as-they-apply-to-
education/print/ 1/5
- Emerging Education Technologies - http://www.emergingedtec
h.com -
Understanding Copyright, Fair Use, and Creative
Commons, as they apply to Education
Posted By Kelly Walsh On October 24, 2010 @ 7:41 am In Free
Tools & Resources,_
Miscellaneous Tools and Topics | 24 Comments
[1]
As we studied this topic in an online course I’m taking, I realize
d how
little I understood it, and figured I wasn’t alone in that regard.
After studying this topic in the “Implementing Instructional Tec
hnology Innovations [2]”
course I am taking online at UW-Stout [3] with instructor Ann
Bell [4], I wanted to understand
it even better, since I struggled with it in the fast paced course a

s we covered it. I have to
imagine that I am not alone in my confusion over how I can or c
an’t use copyrighted
materials, especially in education, where there are some special
allowances.
I assume that when instructors want to know what they can or ca
nnot do with copyrighted
materials, they may often have a hard time figuring it out. I real
ly wanted to understand the
topic and provide resources to help others do the same. Similarl
y, understanding how to
leverage Creative Commons licensing was also not terribly strai
ghtforward, and I wanted to
understand that better too. So I started reading further and learn
ing more.
Using Copyrighted Materials – “Fair Use”
[5]To better understand the topic of Copyright and Fair Use, an
d the
special provisions that have been made for educational uses, I c
ombed
through a lot of materials that our professor had provided. It wa
s a bit
too much to digest all of this content originally, in the rush of g
etting through the week’s
assignments, but at the close of the week, the instructor fortuito
usly reminded me of one
particularly excellent resource.
The resource that really helped to clarify is this excellent 2 pag
e poster-format document
explains Copyright Fair Use in education [6] [Editor’s Note –

I just learned that this link is no
longer functional –
I will try find this document again and provide an updated link
– KW
4/24/11]. Thanks to Technology & Learning [7] for this wonderf
ul resource that summarizes
what educators can do with different types of materials and stay
within the guidelines of what
is acceptable as “Fair Use” of copyrighted materials.
Readers, click here [8] if you would like to
https://www.addtoany.com/share
http://www3.uwstout.edu/soe/profdev/innovations.cfm
http://www3.uwstout.edu/index.cfm
http://annamaebell.com/
http://www.emergingedtech.com/wp/wp-
content/uploads/2010/10/CopyRightSymbols.png
http://www.techlearning.com/techlearning/pdf/db_area/archives/
TL/2002/10/copyright_chart.pdf
http://techlearning.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=islFL7h8ADc
Education » Print
[10]
view a video blog entry for this article.

To learn more, you might also want to check out this Code of B
est Practices in Fair Use for
Media Literacy Education web page and video [9], which is inte
nded to help educators using
media literacy concepts and techniques to interpret the copyrigh
t doctrine of fair use.
Creative Commons
Creative Commons [10] is an extension of Copyright. Creative
Commons licenses give you the ability to dictate how others ma
y
exercise your copyright rights, allowing them to copy your work
,
make derivative works, distribute it, and so on. Creative
Commons strikes me as a wonderful idea, really helping to
expand on copyright and encourage others to use materials in
ways the creators are comfortable with.
There are 6 different types of Creative Commons license types,
and they each have their own
special icons to indicate that they apply to a given work, but I r
arely seem to see them
displayed on works, even when they are clearly supposed to be
Creative Commons licensed
works (as in Flickr’s “Commons” section [11]). To see the symb
ols associated with each
licensing type, click through to this page that explains CC licen
sing types [12] (following is my
attempt at an even further condensed explanation of these):

Attribution: This is the least restrictive license. You can distrib
ute, remix, change, and build
upon the work, even commercially, as long as you credit the ori
ginal creation.
Attribution Share Alike: You can change and build upon the wor
k, even for commercial
reasons, as long as you credit the creator and license your new c
reation under the identical
terms.
Attribution No Derivatives: Allows for redistribution, commerci
al and non-commercial, as
long as it is passed along unchanged and in whole, with credit t
o the creator.
Attribution Non-Commercial: Lets others remix, change, and b
uild upon the work only
non-commercially, and new works must acknowledge the origin
al, but they don’t have to
license those derivative works on the same terms.
Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike: Others can remix, tw
eak, and build upon a
work non-commercially, as long as they credit the creator and li
cense their new creations
under the identical terms. All new work based will carry the sa
me license (derivatives will also
be non-commercial in nature).
Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives: The most restricti
ve license. Often called the
“free advertising” license because it allows others to download
works and share them with
http://www.creativecommons.org/
http://www.centerforsocialmedia.org/fair-use/related-
materials/codes/code-best-practices-fair-use-media-literacy-
education
http://www.creativecommons.org/

http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=commons&q=&m=text
http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/
Education » Print
others as long as they mention the source and link back to it, bu
t they can’t change the work
in any way, or use them commercially.
Understanding these license variations can be a little tough, but
I think the bigger challenge
with Creative Commons is the lack of consistency with which th
is licensing is conveyed for
works found online, and the slow adoption of this concept in ge
neral.
Before closing, I want to mention that one cool site I came acro
ss while learning about CC is
the Creative Commons Mixter. [13] where you can download, sa
mple, and share music
licensed under Creative Commons.
I hope this helps to summarize these licenses concepts, and prov
ides a set of resources that
can help you understand what you can and cannot do under thes
e licensing guidelines.
Related Posts (if the above topic is of interest, you might want t
o check these out):

GRADING RUBRIC MUST BE FOLLOWED TO PASSNOTE Your writing prof.docx

GRADING RUBRIC MUST BE FOLLOWED TO PASSNOTE Your writing prof.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from whittemorelucilla

More from whittemorelucilla (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

GRADING RUBRIC MUST BE FOLLOWED TO PASSNOTE Your writing prof.docx