By: Brad Templeton Presented by: Kelly Canales “10 Big Myths about Copyright Explained?”

Introduction Definition No copyright notice, not copyrighted No charge, not a violation If posted to Usenet, it’s in public domain Post is just fair use Losing copyrights if not defended Derivative works are not copyrighted Defendants win in court Copyright violation isn’t a crime It doesn’t hurt anybody An ed copy is okay Can not reproduce anything

What is Copyright? The legal exclusive right of the author of a creative work to control the copying of that work

"If it doesn't have a copyright notice, it's not copyrighted." In the U.S., everything created privately and originally after April 1, 1989 is copyrighted regardless of notice Assume it is copyrighted A notice strengthens protection, but not required The correct notice: "Copyright [dates] by [author/owner]"

"If I don't charge for it, it's not a violation." It’s still a violation if you give it away If you charge, it could affect the damages awarded in court U.S. exception is the personal copying of music

"If it's posted to Usenet it's in the public domain." False. It doesn’t matter where it is posted, the author must say "I grant this to the public domain“ Some debate that Usenet implicitly grants permission, but it is not in public domain Granting something to the public domain is a complete abandonment of all rights

"My posting was just fair use!" The "fair use" exemption to (U.S.) copyright law was created to allow things such as commentary, parody, news reporting, research and education about copyrighted works without the permission of the author. It should not harm the commercial value of the work -- in the sense of people no longer needing to buy it

"If you don't defend your copyright you lose it." False. Copyright is never lost these days unless given away Trademarks are used to refer to their product or service Ex: Delta airlines and Delta Hotels

"If I make up my own stories, but base them on another work, my new work belongs to me." False. They are called “derivative works” and the owner of the original work has the rights “Fan Fiction” is argued as a violation, but some creators turn a blind-eye because it helps them The exception is parody and criticism

"They can't get me, defendants in court have powerful rights!" The violation is a civil law so you can get sued, but not charged with a crime Principles in criminal law don’t apply Ex: “innocent until proven guilty” The judge or jury decides what evidence to let in and what side to believe

"Oh, so copyright violation isn't a crime or anything?" This is a fairly new, untested statute Ex: violation involving $2500 value was considered a felony Doesn’t mean you will go to jail for posting an

"It doesn't hurt anybody -- in fact it's free advertising." Always ask the owner regardless of how it hurts them Ex: ClariNet pulled an article off their site due to a copyright violation

"They ed me a copy, so I can post it." s are copyrighted so you still need to ask However, the damage might be small since most s have no commercial value You may report what’s on the

"So I can't ever reproduce anything?" Being rewarded by authors encourages promotion Unregistered work gets little protection Works with little commercial value have no damages awarded in court However, their right to control their work has validity

Conclusion Almost all things are copyrighted so ask for permission first unless explicitly in public domain Copyright is a violation regardless of charge, the damages awarded, or how it hurts the creator Copyright doesn’t limit what you can publish Ex: Fair Use