Copy,right or Copyright?

From the years of elementary school, the issue of plagiarism has constantly been expressed.  "Copying others work is wrong", school teachers would explain to their young pupils.  As the years progressed, students were continuously advised not to plagiarize, the emphasis of not copying gradually elevating each year of school.  However, as students learned the basics of plagiarism, the only consequence of the act known to them was the possibility that they would receive a dreadful zero.  Many people are concealed from knowing the greater importance of plagiarism and copyright as well as the complexity of the subject matter.  I was one of those people.  The presentation given by Diane Graves, the librarian at Trinity University has opened my eyes to the gravity of the situation and the as well as the controversies surrounding it.  

 

Although the issue of plagiarism is a commonly known issue, I had little knowledge of copyright laws before the presentation. Copyright laws in the United States have dated back from the 1790's.  Then simply defined as who can copy and distribute work for a certain amount time, the laws have greatly been modified over the years, especially with the growth of technology and internet use. Copyright laws were implemented to provide protection to authors or creators of original works.  By providing an author ownership of his or her work, he or she can make copies and distribute the work and display them publicly.  The laws also partially promote creativity, calling for people to make original works rather than blatant or manipulated copies of others. 

To ensure that these laws are followed, the government has deemed it illegal for anyone to copy or distribute the work of others without gaining prior permission from the copyright owner.  However, materials from the Public Domain are exempt from this law. The Public Domain holds materials "that can be used without requesting copyright permission".  In essence they are publicly available for use.  Publications for which no author, publisher, or copyright holder can be found, also known as "orphan works" are not part of the Public Domain.  Many mistakenly believe that if the creator or author of a work is deceased or the item is out of print, that the work automatically enters the public domain.  This is not true. The term for copyright in 1790 allowed the work to be copyrighted for 14 years before going into the Public Domain, however, the current term for copyright in the US for published works is now defined as the author's life span plus 70 years.  If the work is produced by a public company then copyright extends from the date of publication plus 95 years. However, this general term was further lengthened by the Sonny Bonny Act, also known as the Mickey Mouse Protection Act.  The bill passed in 1998 extended the term of copyright an additional 20 years. Copyright laws seem to be strict and the consequences a little more harsh than just receiving a bad grade. Copyright infringement is a felony.  Criminal cases and lawsuits are possible when considering copyright infringement. 

Copyright terms have generated much controversy within the nation, especially in regards to education. The extensive length of time before a work goes into the Public Domain makes it difficult to use numerous works for educational purposes. The "Fair Use" doctrine was implemented to allow limited use of copied material without gaining permission under justified reasons, such as for education.  However, this does not mean that all educational use falls under "Fair Use".  Strict limitations are administered.  Files online can be used the first time as "Fair Use", but its utilization for a second time requires the institution to pay per person.  This in my opinion is not particularly fair.  Education is ultimately being confined as the lengthy terms of copyright keep materials out of the Public Domain.  Although the "Fair Use" doctrine is supposed to promote education, it does not serve an efficient function in the escalating world of higher education.  As the number of students in higher education increases, doesn't that simply mean that in the end an institution must pay large amounts to use a document? As institutions use funds and money to provide students with documents, which will one day enter the Public Domain, they are losing money they can instead use to pay professors or provide better technology, ultimately to improve the quality of a student's education.  The government has stagnantly stressed the importance of education. I find it ironic that in a way they may actually be limiting it by unrealistically lengthening the term of a copyright.