|
Copy It Right
23 April is World Book and Copyright Day. Whilst we all know about
books, few people know much about copyright. Furthermore, with the
phenomenal growth of the World Wide Web, copyright issues are
becoming more and more relevant.
In the last couple of years, I have had to deal with a few copyright
issues. The first was when I agreed to let a certain publishing
company make use of some of my photographs for a Zambian
publication, free of charge : my way of encouraging publications
about this country. Great, but when the publication was issued, the
photographs had been used, but no acknowledgement given. Yes, they
did jump around and offer to give me a free advert in the next
publication, but I chose not to take up this offer. The explanation
was an administrative error.
A few months later, I was sitting looking at the 2004/5 Zambian
telephone directory when my attention was drawn to the composite
picture on the front cover. ‘Hey, I thought, that looks familiar’.
True enough, when compared with the photo on my computer, it was one
of my photos. The same publishing company, and another
administrative error.
Just shortly after that, Ilse Mwanza drew my attention to a
newspaper supplement published by the National Heritage Conservation
Commission which contained photos copied from her web site (www.imwanza.com/waterfalls.htm).
The explanation from the NHCC was that someone had given them a CD
with photos which they claimed to have taken.
Around the same time, I was contacted by a colleague who hosts a web
site for people who lived (or still live) in Zambia (www.greatnorthroad.org).
In this case, photographs had been copied from this site and used on
the Zambia National Tourist Board website. Emails giving ZNTB the
choice to either acknowledge the source of the photograph or to
remove the said photos went unanswered, although an automated
response acknowledging receipt was received. The same email was
copied to their web designer but despite this taking place in
November of last year, today the same images still appear on their
website and no acknowledgement of the source has been given.
At the same
time, photographs were found on a privately owned Zambian website,
also taken from the Great North Road website. Again, the necessary
emails detailing the choices open to them were sent, and after a
couple of obscenity-laced tirades from the contact person (I
have heard of you and this does not surprise me, the XYZ [name
changed] site is just to promote Zambia and I make no money from
it; I am trying to sell the site and will probably dump it soon
anyway if I can’t find a buyer; this is where I have heard of you
before, f*%! your neighbour, no co-operation sort of thing....that’s
not how things work here in Zambia my friend and I would just keep
your profile down because it can be sent back to where it came from
very easily; Do not be surprised when either immigration or the DEA
come round for a visit – and all this to someone who hosts and
manages the
Great North Road site, free of charge, and who does a
great deal of promotion for Zambia from his home base in Canada),
the images were finally removed.
But it does
not end there. Last week, whilst looking for something on the web
for one of my advertisers, I came across a photograph taken by
myself and posted on the GNR site which had been used in their
website. And the GNR has very specific copyright notices on the
site.
Whilst
ignorance is no excuse under the law, I believe that ZNTB, NHCC and
Zamtel are innocent in the cases related above. The onus should be
placed fairly and squarely on the publishing company and the web
design company. But a lesson should also be learnt – even if you are
employing professionals to do this type of work for you, copyright
issues should be incorporated into the contract with them as they
will, ultimately, be responsible for any breaches. And for the
general person in the street, it is important that you are aware of
copyright issues. Below is an attempt to inform readers of what they
can and cannot do and also to dispel some of the myths regarding
copyright.
The Berne
Copyright Convention, established in 1886, has undergone many
revisions since it was originally drawn up. But what is important,
is that Zambia has ratified this convention, thus the provisions of
the convention are relevant in Zambia.
Even if
something does not have a copyright notice, it is still copyrighted.
Some of the older works around have lost their copyright but it is
always better to be safe and not use it or acknowledge the source.
If someone
does not charge you for something, it is still a violation of
copyright. The only difference would be any damages awarded in
court.
Just because
something has been posted on the internet, in a public domain, it
does not waive copyright requirements. Only if the words ‘I grant
this to the public domain’ or similar are used, does it waive the
copyright. And this, of course, assumes that the person has the
right to post it in the first place.
There is an
issue called ‘fair use’ which is fairly complex and open to
interpretation. But if you publish something from someone else for
the purposes of referring to it, then it is ‘fair use’ (and you do
need to acknowledge the source). But if you are just copying it,
then it is not fair use.
You do not
lose your copyright just because you have not defended it.
If you make up
your own stories based on another work, the new story does not
belong to you. Except in cases of parody or criticism, you would
need the authority of the original owner.
Copyright
issues are dealt with under civil law, not criminal law, so the
‘innocent until proven guilty’ issue does not apply.
Even if it
does not appear to hurt anyone, or even appears to promote that
person’s work, it is still a breach of copyright. Of course, in
cases such as this, it would be entirely up to the owner of the work
to decide whether they wish to pursue the issue further or not, and
this may depend on their disposition on that particular day.
Many people
are under the impression that if they received it by email, they can
pass it on. All email is copyrighted, although it is not secret,
unless previously agreed. But it is unlikely that someone would sue
you for passing on the contents of an email which has no commercial
value, but one should also be cognisant of basic manners and show
their correspondents the courtesy by keeping the content of their
emails secret.
By now, you
are probably thinking that you can’t ever reproduce anything. Quite
the contrary. Copyrighting of work has two main purposes – the
protection of the orginator’s right to a commercial benefit and
their right to control how their work is used. In many cases, the
originator would be delighted that you have used their work as it
promotes them. But in all cases, acknowledgement of the source must
be given. Also, it takes very little time and effort to contact the
originator and ask if you can use their work and that is always the
best route to take.
The recently
introduced Digital Millennium Copyright Act has changed copyright
issues as it has given legal strength to many issues. The basics are
that copyright law gives the creator the exclusive right to control
who can make copies or works from their original work and how these
copies are made. And they can sell licences or the right to do this.
Note though that if you create something in the course of your
employment, the employer has bought this right in advance and what
you created or made belongs to them. Other important things to know
are that copyright does eventually expire – 70 years after the
author dies and facts and ideas cannot be copyrighted; only the
expression of these facts and ideas.
As the world
shrinks and we become, more and more, part of the global village,
one does need to be aware of copyright issues.
Sources:
www.templetons.com/brad/;
www.wipo.org;
www.
wikipedia.org |
April
2006