March 21 meeting notes

From openmichigan

Revision as of 13:39, 20 October 2011 (edit) Jczetta (Talk) ← Older edit

Current revision (14:13, 22 July 2015) (edit) (undo) Bdr (Talk | contribs) m (1 revision)

---

Current revision

• Fair use examples draft

Contents 1 Agenda 2 Fair Use Rationales 3 Considerations for fair use analysis 4 Metatags 5 Best practices in fair use 6 Example Slides 6.1 Slide 1 The New Yorker - Cover 6.2 Slide 2 Obesity Images 6.3 Slide 3 Kanye West - Rolling Stone 6.4 Slide 4 US News and World Report 6.5 Slide 5 Johnny Rockets & Baby With Fries 6.6 Slide 6 Making additions to works 6.7 Slide 7 Nixon and Kennedy 6.8 Slide 8 Cretinism Boys 6.9 Slide 9 Twins 6.10 Slide 10 Screen Shots 6.11 Slide 11 Grateful Dead 6.12 Slide 12 Large Quote 6.13 Slide 13

[edit] Agenda

1. Go through the items we've assembled as candidates for Fair Use
2. (If there is time) Analyze other initiatives. e.g. Guidelines from the Center for the Study of the Public Domain, etc.

[edit] Fair Use Rationales

• Commentary/Criticism
• Transformative Uses
• Necessary Comparison
• Common Sense Items
• Orphan Works

[edit] Considerations for fair use analysis

• is it a dealbreaker? - would the removal of the media completely destroy the educational utility of the resource?
• low quality images--reducing the quality of images or low quality images to begin with will decrease risk
• context of the class
• context of the educational resource (aka slide)
• "how" we are using the work
• centrality of the object to the argument
• illustrative or objects for humor will not be given as much protection (ex: homer simpson image)
• but, we need have this knowledge of how the professor is using it in the context of the course and the context of that particular situation
• direct commentary on the object in question will provide a higher level of fair use than simply using it as an illustrative example

[edit] Metatags

• enter stuff here :)

[edit] Best practices in fair use

• Capture the commentary around the object--we'll know this from the dscribe in the class--publishing this alongside the fair use rationalization
• provide as much context as possible
• better to have the rationale associated with the specific object - "code this"

[edit] Example Slides

[edit] Slide 1 The New Yorker - Cover

• (Jack) With all fair use considerations, the question we have to ask is about how we are using the work. If we are commenting on this item or image in order to make a specific point in the lecture, it's different than merely using it for the sake of humor.
• Working with a faculty member is essential / helpful in making this distinction.
• (Piet)Commentary and Criticism as a category - what general guidance can we establish for decision making?
  • Does this object have a replacement, aka is it for illustrative purposes? If yes, probably not strong candidate for fair use
  • What comment are you making on this slide and what is the educational value here?
  • Objects as teaching tools. Again, if it's central to the lecture point there will be a stronger rationale for fair use.

• Citation aspect.
  • treat lectures like publications - include citations of materials in them.
• Factors / Criteria for making fair use claims
  • Extent of the use of the work - monetary impact
• Is our publishing a rationale sufficient for the entire initiative? Or do we need to have a comment on each item?
  • we're keeping track of the decision-making process anyway when we add metadata, so it's not much more to simply record what factors we think merit FU.

[edit] Slide 2 Obesity Images

• weak fair use argument because most of the images are simply illustrative or used in the context of humor or livening class environment
• What here is crucial to making a specific point?
• Many ways that this could be considered fair use, but does it serve a particularly important educational purpose?
• need to rely on context provided by dscribe and professor
• no privacy concerns here because the person's face is obscured
• generally no privacy concerns if the image has been published in another source

[edit] Slide 3 Kanye West - Rolling Stone

• this is an example from Notre Dame Open CourseWare
• if users click on the image on the site, a blank box opens
• if users "download this course" the image does come along with the download
• notre damn just says that the image is copyrighted, with no other rationale provided
• strong fair use argument here
• Not showing the image with the context of the course material would harm the usefulness of the educational point
• Does cropping the image lower risk? - maybe

• metatags: image quality low, being used as an important example in the lecture, deeply substantive to the context of the lecture, looking at popular culture, using it to invoke a specific point, having no image here destroys the pedagogical aspect.
  • The Factors:
    • Making an educational use(pass), using the whole image (fail), using a creative work (fail), there is a market, but our use of it doesn't affect that market (pass).
• Downloading Items
  • it increases our risk to allow people to do this.
  • take out items from the download pack to reduce the risk.
  • There are ways to distinguish these items.

[edit] Slide 4 US News and World Report

• this image is not as critical or poignant as the New Yorker, but may still be used with contextual information.
• Jack suggests that we may want to highlight the area (by making it bigger or something) that we're actually looking at in order to make the point

[edit] Slide 5 Johnny Rockets & Baby With Fries

• What is the commentary on this image? Are these just generic representations or is there something very clearly argued or commented on?
• Criteria - blurring the names of a company to reduce risk of offending a rights holder.

[edit] Slide 6 Making additions to works

• Derivative, not transformative
• There is no transformative claim here
• Also, there is no real expression in a lot of these.
• how to deal with this?
  • remake it or find a new one in an open license.
• once we have certain types of images up and openly licensed, it can become the seed from which other claims propagate.

[edit] Slide 7 Nixon and Kennedy

• These is no necessary comparison here.

[edit] Slide 8 Cretinism Boys

• can imagine where this is accompanying text that could provide the context.
• probably no privacy issue because of it being published in a widely distributed source
• low DPI helpful/

[edit] Slide 9 Twins

• can imagine where this is accompanying text that could provide the context.
• probably no privacy issue because of it being published in a widely distributed source/

[edit] Slide 10 Screen Shots

• What happens frequently is that we generally want one element. So, focus on the element that is important. Tehn go back to teh same analysis. It is copyrighted material and we need to treat it like other images.
• The dates, and arrangement is helpful.
• We could have lines that distinguish the specific point being made.

[edit] Slide 11 Grateful Dead

• low quality, no commercial confusion
• Even though the image may have a CC license on it, it may not actually be legitimate. We have to be critical and realize that we assume risk in using it.
• Provenance of the metadata is helpful here.

[edit] Slide 12 Large Quote

[edit] Slide 13

Collective consideration and expert advice. Bringing together a standardized set of criteria that then enables us to make the FU claim. Determine the tech. background, metadata, downloads, etc. Practical next steps.