CC- use, re-use, but Take care. There are conditions to keep in mind.
Copyright law gives creators certain kinds of control over their creative work. If people want to use copyrighted work, they often have to ask for permission from the creator. Creative Commons works within copyright law. It allows creators to grant permission to everyone in the world to use their work in certain ways.
Watch the Get Creative video on the origins of Creative Commons licenses. It describes the CC licenses build on traditional copyright law, and captures the power of the licenses to facilitate collaboration across the web.
Share any questions you have about the video below.
Special sidebar: A lot of the public conversation about copyright focuses on "unauthorized" use or copying of creative works. People apply the word unauthorized to imply that the use is also illegal. Under fair use, fair dealing, and other provisions, many uses are simultaneously legal and unauthorized. This course is not going to discuss those uses, but it's important to know they exist. Some resources to learn more about them:
The movie is great, it really helps us understand how CC licenses make it easy for us to share work. That's great because the Stanford chapter clearly illustrates the complexities and murkiness of fair use. I wonder about using sites like flickr with middle school students. Are the images safe for them to search through? Is it like wikipedia where the community checks what's posted?
This video does give a bit of an overview of the issues involved in Copyright and Creative Commons. However, it lacks any substantive information on how to use CC. Presumably this video is meant to wet the appetite, if you will, but now I am hungry and I need to go find more.
The video did a great job of explaining Copyright law which can be very confusing and full of legal jargon. I think explaining how Copyright and Creative Commons work together show that one is not a replacement of the other helped me to better understand what CC really is.
This video was very useful in describing what a Copyright law entitles and why CC would be important or needed. It made it easy to understand that CC makes it easy for a creative owner to allow their work to be used by others in certain ways. While they still own their work, they're allowing others to use their work as well.
Well constructed video that easily explains why CC is needed in the first place! Since we no longer 'assert' copyright because the change in law in the USA in the 80s moved to an 'assumed' model, creators are not even aware they 'own' copyright.
When I explain CC to my audience, I flip the story a bit and explain that CC is a tool to help others understand what rights you have - and they have - in the use of this material.
Interesting approach Danielle. I usually say something like, CC is a license that you can use to communicate how you want your work to be used by others. Or a tool that you can use to share your work with the world on conditions of your choosing. I've also said different things based on who I am talking to, eg. educators and musicians would have different contexts. I think that your approach would work well with more creative types!
I think that cc is important because it lets users know for sure that content can be used. It takes the gray out of the area. The main problem is that there are not enough images, videos, music/sounds that are easily found with cc attributes and so students and their teachers google away and really don't cite works properly or they use the google image search address as the citation. I know that I don't spend time licensing things but as I am creating more and more content and want people to use it, I am going to cc my items.
Hi Sergio - I don't know about any specific OER/educator groups in Portugal, but CC has an affiliate team in Portugal and their website is at http://creativecommons.pt/. More info about them here, too: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Portugal
I was trying to see if there might be an OER project listed from Portugal at http://wiki.creativecommons.org/OER_Case_Studies, but I think you may have to ping the CC Portugal folks for that! There is a CC Brazil OER project at http://wiki.creativecommons.org/OER_Case_Studies#Brazil -- don't know how much overlap there might be in the Portuguese language resources, though.
Thank Goodness for Creative Commons.
If I find the vagaries of Copyright law confusing and limiting (and I do, especially as NZ has it's own variations), then how are my 11 year old students going to be able to cope with it?
I try to get them to only use free to use material and to understand the use of Creative Commons rules to avoid any problems with copyright. They are reluctant at times because it's not as easy as using good old Google Images willy nilly. Otherwise I try and encourage them to create their own images, videos and music but that is not always pracitable.
I'm assuming that if we teach our students to always use Creative Commons for their own work, this will result in an ever increasing pool of work that can be reused and remixed.
A really nice video, very clear and full of ideas to think about!
Copyright and Creative Common are friends since they both pose the same goal: to combat online piracy defending and protecting the freedom of creativity. I think this is an issue that concerns all digital citizens, regardless of their level and sector. This is because the production of culture with the Internet is distributed to all users and is no longer the monopoly of a few. All of us are of the "prosumer", ie simultaneously producers and consumers of content. Unlike a few decades ago when large industries distributing their works technically and legally regulating the use in today's digital world we all have the opportunity to interact directly with the product by finding existing content, creating new ones, remixandoli, and sharing them with the whole world. It 's just that as in any field there are some rules that discipline the procedures founding. On the other hand we must not forget the array of scoundrels who has not made a point to take advantage of freedom of expression on the Internet to legitimize millions in profits without in any way enhance the work of creative people. Being the author of a book, a song, etc.. means having control. But for how long does this control? And what it affects? What guarantees respect to the work the current law on copyright? From the point of view Copyright poses very restrictive and limiting constraints that vary from country to country. In the Italian we have to distinguish two areas: moral rights, which are eternal and inalienable, and the rights of exploitation that have terms up to 70 years after the death and are transferable. With some exceptions and limitations ( e.g. education) to copyright, the control that is recognized by the law on copyright is almost total. A copyright gives the power to decide how to copy, distribute, or reproduce the works. It is not a perpetual right, after 70 years after his death the work becomes public domain that anyone can play it without asking permission. Governments enact increasingly restrictive laws that make the Internet less and less free. In France it was decided to punish the violation with a suspension from the network from 3 to 12 months. We move a view that technology can not only get answers on the legal but must have answers in terms of technology. In Italy the decree Urban, prior to the amendment, provided even jail time for those discharged or shared on the Internet copyrighted material. To date for each file that you downloaded and shared you risk a fine of 100 to 1000 Euros. However, today we are at a turning point. The flexibility of digital is that once a work has been digitized it becomes liquid and what is liquid can’t be blocked and governed according to the old parameters of copyright. If producers and consumers identify why one should keep buying the things that someone else does? If you can make them yourself and ask others to collaborate and improve them and we act according to the logic of barter, that is exchanged for what you do with what others are doing, why it should be available to buy something you do not can change, you can not touch, you can not manipulate? We have entered a new era, the era of mass collaboration, people collaborate, cooperate and produce and make available to their works according to the logic of the Creative Common
A very comprehensive and informative response Maria Teresa! I appreciate the comparison you draw between different European countries views on copyright. One point I might disagree with is that Creative Commons is "to combat online piracy". I don't think Creative Commons was conceived to combat it; I think it was conceived to offer creators more choices in how to share their works, so that they could give permissions to the public to reuse and build upon their works, under conditions of their choosing.
Certainly Sergio and Jane is right what you have written and said. However I think the attribute of the licenses to the work published is very different from share online products without them. One who publishes something using the licenses expresses clearly and inequivolabile own will for use you can do from its product, which at least theoretically should serve to remove other users from attempting to improperly use the works of others. It ' a matter of ethics. In this sense, the Copyright and Creative Common can play a very important role in combating online piracy. Personally when I see a job online that bears the symbol of Copyright or Creative Common I do a lot of attention from the download or freely reuse that product in order to avoid criminal penalties. They are in my opinion symbols that encourage the user to reflect and be careful.
Interesting video, although somewhat regionally-centric. Overall I love the underlying altruistic idea of CC. Certainly in education we are eternally running into the issue of copyright vrs copywrong...
My understanding is that ©, the opponomous "Big C" was not generally legally required elsewhere in the world apart from in the US prior to 1989, when the USA ratified the Berne Convention of 1886. [New Zealand became signatory in 1928]
In my classes I have several times run into the "regionalisation" issue. In NZ we do not have the concept of Fair Use, rather the more restrictive doctrine of Fair dealing, which doesn't for instance include satire - hence the Electoral Enrolment Centre takedown, the Teresa Gatting furor and the Greens attempted amendment bill.
In my learning area my students and myself have frequently come across music video "mash-ups" being created in off-shore educational establishments [some really exciting and engaging tasks] and shared under an understanding of Fairuse. Now "owning" a CD track [nevermind ripping a Youtube video] only grants a right or licence to play, and then only for personal use, ie not for public performance, further distribution, to sell-on etc.; not withstanding our right to format-shift the media.
In New Zealand, fair dealing includes some copying for private study, research, criticism, review, and news reporting. Sections 42 and 43 of the Copyright Act 1994 set out the types of copying that qualify. The criteria are perhaps most similar to those applying in the UK, although commercial research can still count as fair dealing in New Zealand. Incidental copying, while allowed, is not defined as "fair dealing" under the Act. As in Canada, fair dealing is not an infringement of copyright.
The factors determining whether copying for research or private study is judged to be fair dealing in New Zealand are its purpose, its effect on the potential market or value of the work copied, the nature of the work, the amount copied in relation to the whole work, and whether or not the work could have been obtained in a reasonable time at an ordinary commercial price.
What the act does cover is referenced here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_New_Zealand#Exclusions_and_fair_
The ideas are further muddied by the concept of 'copying for educational use', as here by Otago University. I've arguably breached the legislation by extensively quoting Wikipedia above as I should only have taken a single copy for my own research while drafting this post, not to facilitate an entire list-group; instead providing a the link for you read yourselves.
The issue is our National Qualification Authority [NZQA] requires me to keep and submit assessment materials for moderation; the concern being that we in our good practice, presenting students 'mash-up' (assuming it wasn't already intended for sharing, adding to a clients product, publishing to other media, etc) make a copy for moderation (internally and potentially external), then as marking exemplars, or then in some cases [eg externally marked assessement] posting it on to NZQA for marking.
Contrastingly the Dutch have a remarkably liberal view of the whole issue.
No, I'm not taking the Copyright 4 Educators (AUS) course. I haven't look at the details but I imagined it's no more relevant to NZ than any other national legal jurastiction.
Unless you know different? Would you recommend it? Also I see the course itself was closed to new applicants.
As far as I understand things there's no problem in quoting an entire article from Wikipedia because
Permission to reproduce and modify text on Wikipedia has already been granted to anyone anywhere by the authors of individual articles as long as such reproduction and modification complies with licensing terms
which are all CC-BY-SA 3.0 Unported License
Hi Chris -- yes it's closed now, was just wondering if you were taking both at the same time. Interesting that NZ copyright law is very dif from AU copyright law, when they are so close! Fyi, in case you don't already know, the CC NZ website has a lot of great resources, esp within the context of NZ culture/law: http://www.creativecommons.org.nz/
You also hereby grant each user of the Service a non-exclusive license to access your Content through the Service, and to use, reproduce, distribute, display, publish, make available online or electronically transmit, and perform such Content... [YouTube TOS part 6C]
A common complaint among my students is that there are not enough creative commons images around. They prefer just to Google something because it is easier. Are more organizations using creative commons licensing? Does Google have a mechanism to search for creative commons work?
You can seach through Google Advanced Image search. At the bottom of that page there is a filter setting, which can be set by the type of license you want to access. But there too most people find that the selection is limited. One of the approaches I have been thinking a lot about is that students, and the rest of us, need to develp their own collection of photographs and store them somwhere convenient like Dropbox. This way they can produce their own mash-ups with more ease and peace of mind.
Hope this helps,
Julie is right in regards to Google Advanced search filters. And Mary, thanks for pointing out that great post by Sally.
In week 3 and week 4 of cc4k12 we will go over finding CC-licensed resources and remix, but feel free to jump ahead and peruse the additional resources linked under each week!