The only thing I would point out (and I addressed this at some length on susan douglass’ post for the week) is that companies do not go after teachers, they go after school systems. Since state officials, often working under tight fiscal restraints due to legislative balanced budget processes, are unwilling to use extra money to fight off litigation from Disney or Harcourt Publishing…then they simply pass on restrictive decrees upon all educators in the state.

All because one teacher, in one school district, dared to do something bold and innovative to engage students. It sounds ridiculous, and stupid, but I saw firsthand how this process works at the district and state level. In fact, many of the “head-scratching” policies came from school board members with their own agendas (and political supporters/donors) to appease. But for teachers, working under fair-use, the lid on their innovation was mostly closed shut by a common phrase: “we don’t want to get sued.”

And few people ever asked if anyone actually understood the language in the copyright, or other legal, policies. That also included teachers (myself included). If anything, Clio 1 and DST have shown me that being informed about copyrights can lead to both enlightenment and banging my head on the wall with frustration.

Honestly, if we want to maintain the right to Fair Use, we have to *USE* it, and do so aggressively. Fledgling filmmakers have a profit motive, and they tend to only get into trouble after that motive’s been satisfied– there’s no use suing someone who doesn’t have any money. Or at least, that’s the old model. Organizations like the RIAA and MPAA and others are actually trying to change that to intimidate people out of piracy. But piracy is illegal, where Freedom of Expression and the right to exercise fair use are RIGHTS.

Let’s exercise our rights before they’re steamrolled out of existence.

Being overcautious about copyright encourages the erosion of intellectual freedom and free expression. Because– and I feel like we might disagree here– nobody’s going to go after teachers. Why would you go after someone who’s making forty grand a year (or, if they’re like many PhDs stuck in adjunct-land, as little as <20K) for using your product in a legal fashion in an educational setting? With no hopes of actually getting any real compensatory damages? Why risk the public relations fiasco?

We, as academics, students, educators, are perhaps in a better position than anyone in this country to stand up for fair use. If not us, who?

It’s well known that China (primarily) benefits from “lifting” models, plans, and sketches from Western companies and then putting out similar products in their market at much cheaper prices. Does Disney send its lawyers to Beijing over a 5 second clip of Sleeping Beauty on a Chinese TV show? I imagine they do not. My point here Tad, is that the powerful are seemingly above the copyright laws (in this case: 1.3 billion customers), and the insignificant fly nicely under the radar (your blog would be a good example). Copyright laws, then, disproportionately target those who are small enough to be intimidated. Professors, fledgling documentary filmmakers, small companies, school systems.

So enjoy your anonymity while you have it! Because once you have a nice job with that PhD in hand, the Copyright Wraiths will be watching!