Difference between revisions of "Heins and Beckles (2005)"
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
|Abstract=“Are increasingly heavy assertions of control by copyright and trademark owners smothering fair use and free expression? The product of more than a year of research, Will Fair Use Survive? paints a striking picture of an intellectual property system that is perilously out of balance.” | |Abstract=“Are increasingly heavy assertions of control by copyright and trademark owners smothering fair use and free expression? The product of more than a year of research, Will Fair Use Survive? paints a striking picture of an intellectual property system that is perilously out of balance.” | ||
|Link=https://ncac.org/fepp-articles/will-fair-use-survive-free-expression-in-the-age-of-copyright-control | |Link=https://ncac.org/fepp-articles/will-fair-use-survive-free-expression-in-the-age-of-copyright-control | ||
| − | |Reference=Ogbu (2003); Tushnet (2004); | + | |Reference=Ogbu (2003);Tushnet (2004); |
| − | |Plain Text Proposition=• Many creators are aware of fair use, but often misunderstand how it works, including mistakenly believing that e.g. there are numerical limits on the amount of material that can be used under fair use. | + | |Plain Text Proposition=• Many creators are aware of fair use, but often misunderstand how it works, including mistakenly believing that e.g. there are numerical limits on the amount of material that can be used under fair use.• Fair use practices may be industry specific, with some industries (particularly in film and education) being particularly chilled by clearance culture, whereas bloggers/YouTubers etc. are more liberal in their use of other’s materials. • Almost 50% of the cease and desist/takedown letters surveyed contained weak claims that may have been defeated by fair use or freedom of expression. More than half of the recipients who received such letters acquiesced to the request of the sender. |
| − | + | |FundamentalIssue=5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media) | |
| − | • Fair use practices may be industry specific, with some industries (particularly in film and education) being particularly chilled by clearance culture, whereas bloggers/YouTubers etc. are more liberal in their use of other’s materials. | + | |EvidenceBasedPolicy=B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction) |
| − | |||
| − | • Almost 50% of the cease and desist/takedown letters surveyed contained weak claims that may have been defeated by fair use or freedom of expression. More than half of the recipients who received such letters acquiesced to the request of the sender. | ||
| − | |FundamentalIssue=5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media) | ||
| − | |EvidenceBasedPolicy=B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction) | ||
|Discipline=O34: Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital | |Discipline=O34: Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital | ||
|Intervention-Response=The report provides a range of recommendations, many focussing on improving copyright education and accessibility. This includes: creating a comprehensible clearinghouse on fair use; better uptake and awareness of counter notice procedures; monitor ISPs and their takedown behaviours and; creating a national legal support centre. The report also suggests some statutory amendments, including a reduction of penalties (including the elimination of monetary damages in cases where fair use was reasonably presumed) and introduction of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. | |Intervention-Response=The report provides a range of recommendations, many focussing on improving copyright education and accessibility. This includes: creating a comprehensible clearinghouse on fair use; better uptake and awareness of counter notice procedures; monitor ISPs and their takedown behaviours and; creating a national legal support centre. The report also suggests some statutory amendments, including a reduction of penalties (including the elimination of monetary damages in cases where fair use was reasonably presumed) and introduction of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. | ||
| Line 32: | Line 28: | ||
|Method of Analysis=Descriptive statistics (counting; means reporting; cross-tabulation), Qualitative Coding / Sorting (e.g. of interview data) | |Method of Analysis=Descriptive statistics (counting; means reporting; cross-tabulation), Qualitative Coding / Sorting (e.g. of interview data) | ||
|Industry=Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing; Film and motion pictures; Creative, arts and entertainment; | |Industry=Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing; Film and motion pictures; Creative, arts and entertainment; | ||
| − | |Country= | + | |Country=United States |
|Cross-country=No | |Cross-country=No | ||
|Comparative=No | |Comparative=No | ||
| Line 38: | Line 34: | ||
|Literature review=No | |Literature review=No | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | |||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 09:37, 20 April 2020
Contents
Source Details
| Heins and Beckles (2005) | |
| Title: | Will Fair Use Survive? Free Expression in the Age of Copyright Control. |
| Author(s): | Heins, M., Beckles, T. |
| Year: | 2005 |
| Citation: | Heins, M. And Beckles, T. (2005) Will Fair Use Survive? Free Expression in the Age of Copyright Control. A Public Policy Report. Available: https://ncac.org/fepp-articles/will-fair-use-survive-free-expression-in-the-age-of-copyright-control (last accessed 23 May 2019) |
| Link(s): | Open Access |
| Key Related Studies: | |
| Discipline: | |
| Linked by: | |
| About the Data | |
| Data Description: | The study implemented a range of methods, including:
• Focus group discussions with members of PEN American Centre, Women Make Movies, The College Art Association and the Location One Gallery; • Telephone interviews with 17 participants; • An online survey yielding 290 respondents, and; • An analysis of 320 cease and desist and takedown letters. |
| Data Type: | Primary data |
| Secondary Data Sources: | |
| Data Collection Methods: | |
| Data Analysis Methods: | |
| Industry(ies): | |
| Country(ies): | |
| Cross Country Study?: | No |
| Comparative Study?: | No |
| Literature review?: | No |
| Government or policy study?: | Yes |
| Time Period(s) of Collection: |
|
| Funder(s): | |
Abstract
“Are increasingly heavy assertions of control by copyright and trademark owners smothering fair use and free expression? The product of more than a year of research, Will Fair Use Survive? paints a striking picture of an intellectual property system that is perilously out of balance.”
Main Results of the Study
• Many creators are aware of fair use, but often misunderstand how it works, including mistakenly believing that e.g. there are numerical limits on the amount of material that can be used under fair use.• Fair use practices may be industry specific, with some industries (particularly in film and education) being particularly chilled by clearance culture, whereas bloggers/YouTubers etc. are more liberal in their use of other’s materials. • Almost 50% of the cease and desist/takedown letters surveyed contained weak claims that may have been defeated by fair use or freedom of expression. More than half of the recipients who received such letters acquiesced to the request of the sender.
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
The report provides a range of recommendations, many focussing on improving copyright education and accessibility. This includes: creating a comprehensible clearinghouse on fair use; better uptake and awareness of counter notice procedures; monitor ISPs and their takedown behaviours and; creating a national legal support centre. The report also suggests some statutory amendments, including a reduction of penalties (including the elimination of monetary damages in cases where fair use was reasonably presumed) and introduction of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms.
Coverage of Study
Datasets
{{{Dataset}}}
