According to the US Copyright Office, copyright infringement is when a copyrighted work, such as a book, poem, song, or photograph is distributed in a manner that is without the permission of the owner.
This is in contrast to plagiarism because copyright infringement occurs when someone publishes the work of another while correctly crediting those who are responsible for it. Plagiarism, on the other hand, is using someone else's work and calling it one's own.
For example, if a magazine, newspaper, or newsletter published the story "Guts," by Chuck Palahniuk without his permission, those responsible would be have to satisfy Palahniuk with some form of compensation, or he would have to grant them permission after the fact, essentially donating his work to them if not collecting payment for its use.
Fair Use of Copyrighted Materials
As stated in sections 107-118 of the copyright law, some use of copyrighted material is permissible. This is called fair use. However, there is currently no definable number of words or lines of a piece of work that clarifies where fair use ends and infringement begins.
The US Copyright Office's article on this matter makes a strong point in stating that copyright laws are in place not so much to protect specific ideas or content, but the creator's voice.
For example, decreased crime in New York City under the mayorship of Rudy Giuliani has been widely documented. However, if a writer drew a parallel to crime statistics falling and the time that had passed between Roe v. Wade with a two page excerpt from the book, Freakonomics, where the idea was first published, without the permission of the authors, then that writer would be infringing upon someone else's work.
Copyright Infringement in the 2008 Presidential Election
During the 2008 Presidential election, GOP nominee, Senator John McCain (AZ) had approved an ad that used the 1977 hit, "Running on Empty," by Jackson Browne.
Whether or not Sen McCain was running on empty at the point in which the ad was used makes little difference.
As noted on Wired.com's Feb. 23, 2009 article "Infringement Case Against McCain Advances," the singer was very upset because he did not approve of the song being used in the ad, and did not want voters to get the impression that he endorsed McCain when "nothing could be further from the truth."
Copyright Infringement Penalties
As noted in Chapter 5 of the US Copyright Law, the penalties for infringing on copyright can vary. Those who infringe are liable for actual damages by way of profits and statutory damages up to $150,000.
Actual damages are easy to assess. For example, if this article was published without permission in the New York Times, the Times would have to pay a $150 re-print fee in actual damages to cover the lost income plus any statutory fees to cover valuable time spent beyond the initial inquiry for the actual damages. So, the charge would be the real cost and the cost of any time and expenses used to gain it.
What it comes down to is that intellectual property is valuable, and should be protected. Although there are some who feel that music, literature, movies, and other forms of entertainment and information should be free, the truth is that it is not free to create such things.
From a business standpoint, it costs much money to ship the products after thousands had already been spent to put them in a market-friendly package. From an artistic standpoint, musicians spend thousands of dollars on lessons and instruments long before they invest thousands to be in the business of music, just as authors and photographers spend years on their craft, and thousands on their education and equipment.
Without the possibility to recoup the expenses, there would be few professional artists, if any.
 |
