MJPhotos24 wrote in post #11496889
If you're talking about ripping off papers and such, plagiarism, that's one thing - but you can use images in educational material without permission protected by fair use in the US. Problem is nobody - teacher or parent - doesn't teach that beyond that scope it's illegal.
Actually, it's pretty darned hard in practice to use a someone else's image legally under Fair Use.
In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:
- the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
- the nature of the copyrighted work;
- the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
- the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
Using an image almost always runs afoul of consideration #3. Unlike a song, poem, or novel of which you can quote a small portion, use of an image is almost always the entire image. That alone is normally a "fair use" killer.
Because the entire image is usually used, it will also run against consideration #4, because if the full image is available in an unauthrized source, there is less need to go to the authorized source.
Running afoul of #3 is because of the nature of the image as a nearly atomic whole that running afoul of #2 is almost always the case.
So people depending on "Fair Use" for an image are normally depending on conideration #1 alone...and the Courts rule pretty strictly on that -- a whole lot of non-profit and educational organizations have wound paying infringement penalties. Parody or editorial criticism under fair use requires that the parody or criticism be specifically of the used work. For instance, I can make fair use of someone's copyrighted image of a politician under consideration #1 only in a criticism or parody of that photograph--not of the politician.