Copyright and schools

Hmmm, my daughter had a project where she was supposed to include pictures of her research subjects. What does she do: she googles the subject and downloads/prints the pics.

That got me thinking: isn't this technically potentially illegal? Shouldn't the teacher make sure the kids get the photographers' permission? After all, kids should be able to trust their teachers.

I know this is really harmless but it is the foundation of the kids' belief that it is ok to just download pics. As if anything they find online is there for the taking. Next thing we know these guys are all grown up stealing photographs for more serious puropses (Dwight's thread comes to mind, you can search for that).

I'd really be interested to know what you think.

When I was in school plagiarism and having anything without cited sources got me an automatic F. I would cite the source of the picture somewhere so it can't be viewed as your daughter's own work.

I think the teachers need to point that out. They just talk about the written stuff. (Uh-oh! My daughter is NOT happy with me about this right now!!! Her homework just got longer)

If you're finding something on google images, it's more than likely either orphaned or public domain. If you don't want your work used, don't post it on the internet. If you don't want someone else taking credit for your work, but don't mind people using it, watermark.

It's not as though taking a picture into class is the same thing as stealing someone else's images and making profit off of them. You're certainly right to teach your children about image theft, but downloading something off of google images for one's personal, non profit, educational use doesn't constitute stealing in my opinion.

I think it might be covered under educational use & would be OK for students to do that for school work? But I agree that they should be made aware of what © means & what isn't legal use of someone else's work.

griptape wrote in post #5608700
If you're finding something on google images, it's more than likely either orphaned or public domain.

Crap!

Thats what educational use is all about. I would have to do some research to confirm, but I think you are still required to give credit for all usage. It doesn't have to be public domain, it just has to be credited to the author or artist.

My college was particularly anal about following rules with that sort of thing, and we were taught that as long as you document everything is fare game. I wish schools included some education about what the law is exactly though, especially since it changes for you the day you graduate.

jbimages wrote in post #5609556
Crap!

Then would you mind explaining to me what the difference is between all of the 7 billion people on earth being able to see your picture by typing a word into google images, and viewing it on their own computer screen (which they can ALL do, it's on there for everyone to see) without paying a penny for it, and a child printing that image so others don't have to type the word in for their personal educational use? If it's free for everyone to see, it's orphaned or public domain, whether you like it or not. If you don't like it, don't put it on the internet.

Is sending someone a link to a publicly available website that the author of the work posted theft? Then neither is printing that website and citing the source.

You have to credit your sources all the time.

4 factors that you need to know about Fair use

Nature - print, digital, etc.
Purpose - newsworthy, educational
Amount - how much of the work is being used.
Effect - how will this affect the copyrighted work

All 4 factors must be balanced out and their connection to the use must be evaluated.

Cite the source.

Thanks for you insight, guys

I talked to my daughter's teacher this morning and she agrees now that the kids should be made aware that the sources need to be cited.

I just made 30 little enemies :o

griptape wrote in post #5608700
If you're finding something on google images, it's more than likely either orphaned or public domain.

If you click on any pic from Google images you'll see it says "Image may be scaled down and subject to copyright." next to the thumbnail.

If kids take pics from the web for projects it's not a problem in my opinion as long as they learn that this is a special case. Otherwise they grow up and continue to think it's ok. It's the mindset they get into.

If you do a search here on copyright infringement you'll find tons of threads. I would bet most of the people who stole pics did so without thinking it was a problem. And why? Because they grew up doing it from the time they were in elementary school.

Tell them to cite and you create awareness. Maybe.

The kids should be made aware of the copyright issue and and public domain.

My son's class was told to search for a certain type of photo. He thought he would take the easy way out and take on off of my web site. Boy was he surprised that Right Click didn't work. That was his first lesson from me about copyrights. Lesson 2 was when I paid for music to use in a slide show and explained that you cannot have the attitude that "no one will know"

dazzlebea wrote in post #5608372
That got me thinking: isn't this technically potentially illegal? Shouldn't the teacher make sure the kids get the photographers' permission? After all, kids should be able to trust their teachers.

Your question focuses on copyright (the right of the creator of a work to control who copies it, when and where); many of the answers have focused on plagiarism (passing someone else's work off as your own, or not citing the source of something). The two are not the same, and people shouldn't confuse them. Simply citing a source solves the question of plagiarism, but does not resolve the copyright issue.

In the US (and most other countries), copyrights are governed by federal law (here, 17 United States Code Section 101 and following, cited as 17 U.S.C. Sec. 101 et seq.). In the copyright law, there's a provision for "fair use" defined as "use... for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research." 17 U.S.C. Sec. 107. That section also sets out four factors to consider in determining whether a use is fair or not:

(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;

(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Looking at the test in its entirety, a bunch of schoolkids copying photos from the web for a school report is about 99.99999% sure to be a fair use.

But I love that you raised the issue with the teacher and that she's going to raise it with the kids.

And yes (sigh... I've already heard all the jokes), I am a lawyer.

griptape wrote in post #5610415
Then would you mind explaining to me what the difference is between all of the 7 billion people on earth being able to see your picture by typing a word into google images, and viewing it on their own computer screen (which they can ALL do, it's on there for everyone to see) without paying a penny for it, and a child printing that image so others don't have to type the word in for their personal educational use? If it's free for everyone to see, it's orphaned or public domain, whether you like it or not. If you don't like it, don't put it on the internet.

Is sending someone a link to a publicly available website that the author of the work posted theft? Then neither is printing that website and citing the source.

Other posters have given you various answers to your question and have mentioned copyright infringement. As a copyright holder I have various rights, one is that I can let people look at what I create and expect that they only do what I allow them to do. Copying and printing a photograph when the author does no allow it is a breach of copyright.

You suggest that if something is free or everyone to see, then its orphaned or public domain. Try that argument in your local art gallery!

An orphaned work is not public domain, it's a copyrighted work where the owner is not known. One way of creating an orphaned work is to print an image from a web page and not credit the author, another way is to steal an image by doing a screen capture, resulting in a low resolution image without any EXIF or IPTC data. If the author of an image that is shown on the internet is known, that image is not an orphan.

Linking to an image on a publically available website is an acceptable practice if the website owners allow it, if not, it is called bandwidth theft.
You can google the term if you don't understand.

Sending someone a link to a website is an acceptable practice, the image will then be seen in the context the author desires.

I haven't mentioned fair use as it is not universal. Not all laws are created equal. There is no "fair use" defence in Australian Copyright Law.