Wk1: Comment #2 to David Cheng

David,

The last paragraph of your post really intrigued me so I just had to respond. I worked in a graphics and printing department at the university level for 21 years and I am really sorry that you had to experience that particular issue with the use of images purchased by another unit at your institution. This was a topic I had to deal with on many occasions. The first thing I can say is that you are not completely crazy in thinking that the use of materials purchased by web designers at your institution is a violation of copyright laws. What’s important to know is that there is something that is referred to as “Multi-Seat Licenses” when it comes to purchased image subscriptions. This is described as such:

           

“Notwithstanding the restriction contained in section 4(a)(11) of the Standard License Prohibitions limiting you to a single seat or location to use the Content, you shall be entitled with respect to this Content to an unlimited number of seats or users of the Content within your organization, provided all such users are either employees or agree with us to be bound by the Agreement, and that you remain liable for all use by such additional users. The Agreement is hereby deemed amended in that respect. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain in full force and effect, including all Prohibited Uses.”

My suggestion for you would be to investigate this and determine if they have a “Multi-Seat License” for the images they have purchased. If indeed they do, you are entitled to use those images. Without a license for multiple users, they have the right to deny access and use of any such purchased image and/or subscriptions.

Original Blog Post by David:

There are so many things in the world that are happening with copyright..., and the way it has held and stiffened our potential, it should be considered a crime of the highest order. While we (this applies to many countries, but I'm referring to the USA) fight for censorship, we still haven't recovered from the weakening of the "press" and the powers they used to give us. Many companies don't fear the "press" anymore, ...because they own it.

I loved the clips, specially the Ted.com one, and the Remix Culture one (a logo of my Alma matter, Temple University's Media Education Lab appears in one of the pamphlets at 2:08). I think they make you think about the future of copyright, and the urge to fight before everything is off limits, and everyone becomes a pirate.

I apologize if I sound like I'm venting, but this is the issue that broke my dream of becoming a journalist (I studied journalism, and changed it to communications). I went to "The Philadelphia Inquirer" for a short internship, and after being explained what I could do and not do (can't disclose this), I just picked my things and left. This became my fastest internship ever. But I hope that enough pressure can be put to some of these corporations by the next generations, that eventually they will let go and give us our uncensored, free of permissions free speech expression. But to other matters...

There is this case at work that baffles me, and maybe I should ask a lawyer about this, but I put it here anyways, and please let me know what you think. I work in a media and online course department, in a community college, which produces courses and also videos for broadcasting and other purposes. Sometimes I need a stock photo for an internal video (one that won't circulate outside of the institution). We have some web designers that have subscriptions for some of these stock photo websites. When I go to one of them to ask for a photo, they tell me that the license is in their personal name, and that only they can use the photos. I then tell them, we not only work for the same educational institution, but also in the same department. There is no money made for some of these videos, and not even students will see these videos. They say they can only use the photos for their own projects at work, and can't even accept collaborators in their projects, or this would be a copyright violation. If the college paid for these subscriptions, then shouldn't they be open to their employees? I tried to read the copyright notices, and couldn't find much clear information as to confirm or debunk this. Since then, I just take a Canon 5D MkII and the college car, and go take my own pictures for the videos. Neither my supervisor nor the media managers want to take sides on this issue either. Would this fall in fair use if I take a picture (that is crucial to complete the video) that my co-worker used for a similar project and use it? Is this something that would merit a lawyer? Let me know what you think, thanks.