1. Once a work is created, it is immediately copyrighted to the creator of the work. Because the woman who received the cease and desist letter used the graphic images in a presentation prior to the new text, she obviously owned the image beforehand. This case is unfortunate since it seems as if someone who attended her conference stole her work and then blamed the original owner of the work.
2. Although the presenter had the images prior to the new text and therefore should not be considered in violation of copyright, one could argue she is abiding by fair use policy regarding the amount of work taken and used as compared to the entire work. Since the presenter is only utilizing the images and not any text or other features of the book, she is abiding by fair use.
3. If blamed for copyright infringement (even though the presenter had the images before the new text was even published), one could argue that because the images were used for purposes of education without profit then she is entitled to fair use.
4. Although the presenter is not in violation of copyright, the individual who obtained the images for purposes of making a profit is in violation of fair use. Because the graphics were not used for nonprofit educational use and instead intended for profit, fair use guidelines have been broken.
5. As noted in example 2, the concept of "how much" applies to this situation. I argued the presenter could be in abidance with fair use since it was so little of the work which was used. One could argue the individual who created the text book used fair use to obtain and use the images; however, this is false since that individual's purpose was to make a profit in the end.
Excellent assessment all around.
ReplyDeleteThanks!