I have read all five scenarios in the blog post. And I think that those scenarios are unfair. Those scenarios should be in the category of Fair use and Fair dealing as copyright does not prohibit all copying or replication. I think the following factors should be under considerations:
1. the purpose and character of your use
2. the nature of the copyrighted work
3. what amount and proportion of the whole work was taken, and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
I also realized that the copyright law is different in different countries. For example, in Canada, private copying for personal use has been expressly permitted by statute since 1999. In the US, making one complete copy of a work or in many cases using a portion of it, for commercial purposes will not be considered fair use. What is commercial use? If you make 10 copies or more is construed to be commercial, but there is no general rule permitting such copying. Make long story short, there are too many confusions in current copyright law.
I think it is not fair in the scenarios mentioned in the article. Because those scenarios are fair use based on above mentioned factories. Because we are in the information age, our communication language is not limited in A-Z characters any more. All the sounds, images become part of elements in current communication language. It is fair to use part of these language elements in the communication as long as the copy are within the consideration of the factories mentioned above. Otherwise, we have no way to communicate effectively.
I think we should have things like “intellectual property”. In law, intellectual property (IP) is an umbrella term for various legal entitlements which attach to certain names, written and recorded media, and inventions. The holders of these legal entitlements may exercise various exclusive rights in relation to the subject matter of the IP. The adjective “intellectual” reflects the fact that this term concerns a process of the mind. The noun “property” implies that ideation is analogous to the construction of tangible objects. Consequently, this term is controversial. We need these laws to limit the abuses of people’s creation, for example, the copyright which subsists in relation to a Mickey Mouse cartoon prohibits unauthorized parties from distributing copies of the cartoon or creating derivative works which copy or mimic Disney’s particular anthropomorphic mouse, but does not prohibit the creation of artistic works about anthropomorphic mice in general, so long as they are sufficiently different to not be deemed imitative of the original. I think this is needed!
I think that I have used materials in a way that was against copyright. For example, I have downloaded many articles and images and shared with my friends over internet. Although, I pointed out those are not my works, I did not sent links with the original works. I also did not know what the proper ways to handle these issues are. I truly expect that there is a clear way to guide user doing these properly.
I have not created any web site purely for the commercial purpose. However, I am going to create one for my friends soon. After taking these copyright courses, I realize that I cannot use something in my previous design because copyright law prevented it. For example, there are many very well designed wedding cake pictures in the web. I can download these pictures and put them in my web. However, I should not do that way as my web site is for the commercial purpose this time. I have to get permission from the creators or I have to create my own one.
Everything needs a balance and limit. Copyright need a balance and limits as well. These will make true fair use possible.
