Hi, just a little remark: "copyrighted material" is not the point itself.

If this copyrighted material is released under a free content license, there isn't such questions: people purposely put their works under licenses allowing freedoms like use, study, modification and redistribution. Cf.: http://freedomdefined.org/Licenses#List_of_licenses

You may better use another wording to define what you're speaking about, since you're speaking about "a certain type" of copyrighted material. Lots of people think about copyright as a mean of restricting others' freedoms relative to their creations. It may be related the origin of the creation of such legal artefacts. But since the 80's, copyright is sometimes used to grant freedoms, too!

Fair use is the minimal set of freedoms, but some authors have understood they have a huge interest in letting others use their original work in a broader way.

What a great webinar it was. I just finished it, belatedly, because of a snow day, but I, too was delighted with the information. Renee Hobbs was clear and gave us lots of information. She addressed a number of issues that schools confront and shared some of the history of copyright law that explained how things have become defined in certain ways.

I still came out with a question, however, and wonder if you have any thoughts.

At my school we have many assemblies, and they are filled with poetry, songs, creative writing, and other contributions. We film these for the archives, but now parents are asking us to make CD copies for the students who participate. Each assembly is a learning activity, designed for students to interact with and learn more about a particular subject, hence the various songs poems, speech excerpts, etc. For instance, each year we have a spectacular Martin Luther King assembly with excerpts, songs, poems, and much more. Students memorize, recite, dramatize, tell stories and much more. Most of the material is under traditional copyright.

Do you think this counts as transformative in that we are taking the materials and using it in a unique new way (in which case I think we could make copies for the participants) or are we just replaying or copying the materials (in which case we do need to ask permission for each item before we make copies)?

Any thoughts?

Raphael: No, I'm pretty certain I meant what I said. I understand about Creative Commons and similar licensing schemes (I know I didn't post explicitly about them - perhaps next time), but even those licensing schemes can be overridden by fair use, as I understand it. So if someone posts something under a BY-NO-SA CC licence, that is "attribution - non commercial - share alike," I can still recontextualize it and use it commercially, or without sharing alike. That's important to know, too, I think. I do agree with you that copyright law isn't necessarily a restrictive thing, though!

Marty: I'm pretty sure that's okay, but I'm not a lawyer and I can't give legal advice. ;) Among other things, it seems like a dramatic interpretation is naturally transformative - and so is an impassioned recitation. That said, if you're distributing the copies as mementos (not as actual educational tools), the ground gets a little murkier, doesn't it?

Thanks for your kind words about the webinar, everyone! (You may also enjoy watching our "Schoolhouse Rock" style music videos on copyright and fair use-- now at the Media Education Lab website and on our You Tube channel.

Marti, I appreciate your question about the filming of student assemblies. Thank goodness we don't have to ask a lawyer whether this "counts" as fair use. Educators can decide for themselves using reasoning.

You point out that your students are taking the materials and using it in a unique new way -- that is, in the selection and arrangement of the materials, your assembly program is a new creative work, a transformative fair use. The "added value" is then the unique arrangement and the use of the materials as a learning experience/performance experience for learners.

You also say that perhaps you're just re-playing or copying the materials and should get permission to make a copy. If so, then if you made and distributed a CD, there would perhaps be a negative market impact for the original materials. If you think that the CDs of the performance affect the market for the original material, then your use would not be fair.

When you purchase a license to perform a school play, often there are restrictions involved about videotaping. If you paid a license to get a script that you performed, then the license trumps fair use.

Also, it's good to know that if you use good-faith reasoning, and someone decides to sue you, you are exempting from paying damages if you are a teacher or librarian. Courts know that we educators do our best with fair use given its flexibility... so they give us the benefit of the doubt!

This topic did not come up often enough among ML educators for us to include it in the Code. But thanks for raising it--- because I'm sure lots of teachers wonder about this stuff!