AF
By applying the interpretations and standards as set out below for copyright law, that what copyrighted material is currently used on Grange Hill Online cannot infringe copyright law.
The copyright law is not as defined in the UK as in the US, though the law is virtually identical. Many cases have been brought before the Supreme Court in the US, who interpreted the copyright law as defined below. However there is one UK case that may be particulalry important in regard's to the Grange Hill Online site:-
Carlton made a tv documentury and included a small clip from another (non Carlton) programme for illustrative purposes for which they did not get permission to use from the copyright holders, who subsequently took Carlton to court over breach of copyright. Carlton argued that they gave credit to the original copyright holder and that the clip shown was brief compared to the length of the actual programme and that it was shown for the purposes of criticism and commentary. The court backed Carlton saying that they did not breach copyright law as what they used was allowed under the 'fair use' banner within the law.
The four standards for 'fair use' in copyrighted material that the court used to make their ruling is as follows:-
The purpose and character of the use.
Selected portions of copyrighted materials may be copied for specific purposes. These include but are not strictly limited to non-commercial educational purposes, such as teaching, scholarship, research, criticism, commentary, review and news reporting.
The nature of the copyrighted work.
Fair use more readily applies to the copying of whole paragraphs from a primary source (newspaper, research document, etc.) than say, to copying a chapter from a textbook (primarily designed for copying for learning/teaching purposes). The same would apply for any work in whatever format (printed, electronically stored, etc.)
The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole.
Reproducing extracts from copyrighted works, that are relatively short compared to the work as a whole and that do not capture the main essence of the work are generally considered as fair use. Copyright is infringed where either the whole or a substantial part of a work is used without permission. A substantial part is not defined in copyright law but has been interpreted by the courts to mean a qualitatively significant part of a work.
The effect of use on the potential market for or value of the work.
If copying/distributing the work does not reduce sales or the value of the original work, then the use could be considered fair.
There are two other guidelines regarding the fair use of copyrighted materials.
Firstly:- The material must have been made available to the public (this is to stop the publication of things such as certain legal and government documents).
Secondly:- An acknowledgement to the original copyright holder, in a suitable and prominent place.
So to sum up, in terms of The Grange Hill Online website:-
1. The copyrighted material used is for non commercial purposes (The site is not there to make money from the use of the material).
2. The copyrighted material used is for criticism, commentary, review and news reporting (eg. Pictures only used to comment on characters and to illustrate who they are).
3. Compared to the size of the official Grange Hill site, the amount of copyrighted material used from it on the Grange Hill Online site is comparably short.
4. The Grange Hill Online site does not capture the main essence of the official Grange Hill site (the official site focusses on the current series, whereas Grange Hill Online covers the whole of the Grange Hill years).
5. The use of the copyrighted material does not reduce the sales or the value of Grange Hill, if anything it enhances it's sales/value, through promoting the Grange Hill programme and encouraging people to watch the show, thus generating a higher viewer share than other competing television channels, in turn creating greater revenue for the producing companies.
6. The copyrighted material used is not confidentail and is already in the public domain.
7. All copyrighted material is always acknowledged and the site as a whole does not claim to be an official site, so is therefore not attempting to mislead visitors. (there are even links to the official site).
Ryan Wiggs
Gavin Scott posted:
And try and get your head around this simple fact, Arnie Fan: It doesn't matter whether Simons site is full and well presented. The content is protected in law by copyright, and if you insult the owners then they have a right to stop you.
Grange Hill is NOT public property, however much you wish it were so.
Grange Hill is NOT public property, however much you wish it were so.
By applying the interpretations and standards as set out below for copyright law, that what copyrighted material is currently used on Grange Hill Online cannot infringe copyright law.
The copyright law is not as defined in the UK as in the US, though the law is virtually identical. Many cases have been brought before the Supreme Court in the US, who interpreted the copyright law as defined below. However there is one UK case that may be particulalry important in regard's to the Grange Hill Online site:-
Carlton made a tv documentury and included a small clip from another (non Carlton) programme for illustrative purposes for which they did not get permission to use from the copyright holders, who subsequently took Carlton to court over breach of copyright. Carlton argued that they gave credit to the original copyright holder and that the clip shown was brief compared to the length of the actual programme and that it was shown for the purposes of criticism and commentary. The court backed Carlton saying that they did not breach copyright law as what they used was allowed under the 'fair use' banner within the law.
The four standards for 'fair use' in copyrighted material that the court used to make their ruling is as follows:-
The purpose and character of the use.
Selected portions of copyrighted materials may be copied for specific purposes. These include but are not strictly limited to non-commercial educational purposes, such as teaching, scholarship, research, criticism, commentary, review and news reporting.
The nature of the copyrighted work.
Fair use more readily applies to the copying of whole paragraphs from a primary source (newspaper, research document, etc.) than say, to copying a chapter from a textbook (primarily designed for copying for learning/teaching purposes). The same would apply for any work in whatever format (printed, electronically stored, etc.)
The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole.
Reproducing extracts from copyrighted works, that are relatively short compared to the work as a whole and that do not capture the main essence of the work are generally considered as fair use. Copyright is infringed where either the whole or a substantial part of a work is used without permission. A substantial part is not defined in copyright law but has been interpreted by the courts to mean a qualitatively significant part of a work.
The effect of use on the potential market for or value of the work.
If copying/distributing the work does not reduce sales or the value of the original work, then the use could be considered fair.
There are two other guidelines regarding the fair use of copyrighted materials.
Firstly:- The material must have been made available to the public (this is to stop the publication of things such as certain legal and government documents).
Secondly:- An acknowledgement to the original copyright holder, in a suitable and prominent place.
So to sum up, in terms of The Grange Hill Online website:-
1. The copyrighted material used is for non commercial purposes (The site is not there to make money from the use of the material).
2. The copyrighted material used is for criticism, commentary, review and news reporting (eg. Pictures only used to comment on characters and to illustrate who they are).
3. Compared to the size of the official Grange Hill site, the amount of copyrighted material used from it on the Grange Hill Online site is comparably short.
4. The Grange Hill Online site does not capture the main essence of the official Grange Hill site (the official site focusses on the current series, whereas Grange Hill Online covers the whole of the Grange Hill years).
5. The use of the copyrighted material does not reduce the sales or the value of Grange Hill, if anything it enhances it's sales/value, through promoting the Grange Hill programme and encouraging people to watch the show, thus generating a higher viewer share than other competing television channels, in turn creating greater revenue for the producing companies.
6. The copyrighted material used is not confidentail and is already in the public domain.
7. All copyrighted material is always acknowledged and the site as a whole does not claim to be an official site, so is therefore not attempting to mislead visitors. (there are even links to the official site).