Copyright is essential to how our society runs, without it
no one would receive credit or acclamation for their hard graft as it could simply
be taken and publicised by anyone and everyone.
Fortunately there is protection out there for the creative
types in the form of Copyright law, primarily in the Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act 1988. This is a law which controls who can use or copy your work
that has been achieved by artistic or intellectual endeavour.
It is essential for journalists to understand the laws surrounding
copyright as this effects what you can include in your publication, and it also
protects your own journalistic articles as well.
Copyright does not protect ideas it only protects the form
in which those ideas are executed. There is also no copyright in facts, news or
information. This allows for news organisations to “lift stories” which have been
broken by other publications. However there may be infringements in lifting
phrases or quotes from the original report (this shouldn’t be your only concern
if you plan to lift other people’s quotes – you should be primarily concerned
with whether they are true).
Copyright of a literary, musical, dramatic or artistic work lasts
for the lifetime of the author and then another 70 years after the date of
their death.
A beautiful tool for journalists that gives a little bit of
freedom when it comes to copyright is “fair dealing”. When reporting current
events, fair dealing allows publications to use otherwise copyright protected
work. Now this doesn’t mean you can be cheeky and take advantage, you still
have to be respectful. You should not take “unfair commercial advantage of the
copyright owner by excessive publication of the copied work”. You must also
allow for sufficient acknowledgement by either naming its author or creator, or
cite the works title, or include at least an identifying description of it.
This is almost a weekly battle on WINOL as journalists debate what can be used,
or how much of something can be used, whilst still being protected by “fair
dealing”. Basically as long as you don’t exploit someone else’s work for your
own gain, then you’re good.
A WINOL example of this is my story on the energy price hike:
You are also protected by “fair dealing” if you are using the work for the purpose of criticism of review. To be covered the work must have already been made available to the public with the consent of the owner, so it doesn’t count if it has been somehow leaked.
A perfect WINOL example of this instance of “fair dealing” would be Harry
Parkhill’s film reviews:
You are also exempt from the rules of copyright if it is for the purpose of parody. An example of this is “Dumb Starbucks” which used the Starbucks logo and store design for the purpose of parody.
Dumb Starbucks - The Independent
