The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.0365 Monday, 21 February 2000.
[1] From: Dana Shilling <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Friday, 18 Feb 2000 18:08:24 -0500
Subj: Re: SHK 11.0358 Re: Rights to Images
[2] From: Nora Kreimer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Saturday, 19 Feb 2000 09:38:24 -0300
Subj: RE: SHK 11.0358 Re: Rights to Images
[3] From: Mark Aune <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Sunday, 20 Feb 2000 16:36:17 +0000
Subj: Re: SHK 11.0358 Re: Rights to Images
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Dana Shilling <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Friday, 18 Feb 2000 18:08:24 -0500
Subject: 11.0358 Re: Rights to Images
Comment: Re: SHK 11.0358 Re: Rights to Images
Copyright law, created at a time when printing was laborious, hasn't
really caught up with photocopying, much less the Web. However, a case
decided by the (federal) District of Utah, Intellectual Reserve Inc. v.
Utah Lighthouse Ministry Inc, No. 2:99-Cv808C (12/6/99); summarized at
68 US Law Week 1399 says that the act of browsing itself creates a copy.
The case is mostly about contributory infringement-it says that there
are circumstances in which posting links to copyrighted material, to
sites where the material appears without consent of the owner, may
create liability for contributing to copyright infringement that occurs
when users follow the links.
Dana "Not respected with man, woman, or child" Shilling
[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Nora Kreimer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Saturday, 19 Feb 2000 09:38:24 -0300
Subject: 11.0358 Re: Rights to Images
Comment: RE: SHK 11.0358 Re: Rights to Images
Must I infer that my classroom activities on the reproduction of
medieval manuscripts or Italian paintings of the Renaissance, as well as
the Droeshout or Chandos portraits are safe from penalization when they
are not meant for commercial purposes, but for purely academic ones?
The ultimate decision seems to lie in the interpretation of the word
"duplication", which does not equate necessarily with profit, but with
scholarly use. Can someone help me out of this maze?
With illustrated gratitude,
Nyke
[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mark Aune <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Sunday, 20 Feb 2000 16:36:17 +0000
Subject: 11.0358 Re: Rights to Images
Comment: Re: SHK 11.0358 Re: Rights to Images
There are a number of resources on the web that deal with issues of
copyright and fair use.
On fair use:
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/
National Initiative for a Networked Cultural Heritage:
http://www-ninch.cni.org/
Terry Carroll's page has a number of resources including links to the US
Copyright office:
http://www.aimnet.com/~carroll/copyright/faq-home.html
An on-line essay:
Michael Best. "What's Mine Is Mine and What Is Yours Is Yours,"
http://web.uvic.ca/shakespeare/Annex/Articles/SAA1997.html
None of these sites provides anything like a definitive answer because
there is no definitive answer, unfortunately.
Mark Aune
Department of English
Wayne State University
