#20421
Register, Trademark and Copyright Symbols
Register, trademark and copyright symbols are important communicators. They help establish brand identities and protect creative work from theft or plagiarism. Despite their legal and symbolic power, these symbols need to speak softly, typographically speaking. Their tasteful and appropriate use is a small but significant part of good typography.
Strizver, Ilene. Upper and lowercase Magazine (2002). Articles>Intellectual Property>Trademark>Typography
#28831
Remix as "Fair Use": Grateful Dead Posters' Re-Publication Held to Be a Transformative, Fair Use
On May 9, 2006, in Bill Graham Archives v. Dorling Kindersley, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld the lower court, finding the use of several Grateful Dead Poster images appearing in a band biography was a 'fair use' under section 107 of the US copyright statute. In the case, the publisher Dorling Kindersley used without permission seven images of Grateful Dead concert posters or tickets in the book Grateful Dead: The Illustrated Trip (2003). Prior to the book's publication, the publisher had unsuccessfully attempted to negotiate permissions with the copyright holder, Bill Graham Archives. Due to what the publisher perceived as an unreasonable licensing fee, permission agreements were never reached. Nonetheless, the publisher used the seven images in the book, incorporating them into remixed compositions, consisting of collages mixed with graphic art and textual explanations and commentary. Over 2000 images were used in the book. After the book's publication, Bill Graham Archives brought suit for copyright infringement, and requested an injunction blocking further publication.
Rife, Martine Courant. NCTE (2007). Articles>Intellectual Property>Copyright>Case Studies
#21083
Representations and Perceived Information Architecture (PIA)
This article discusses two key ideas. First, it briefly outlines four ways to represent the same information. Second, it provides a high-level overview of Perceived Information Architecture.
Rhodes, John S. WebWord (2001). Articles>Intellectual Property>User Centered Design
#25270
Revising Copyright Law for the Information Age
Our current copyright law is based on a model devised for print media, and expanded with some difficulty to embrace a world that includes live, filmed and taped performances, broadcast media, and, most recently, digital media. That much is uncontroversial. The suitability of that model for new media is much more controversial.
Litman, Jessica. Oregon Law Review (1996). Articles>Intellectual Property>Copyright
#22254
Safeguarding Intellectual Property 
This 'best practices' note collects tips and techniques for preserving your investment in e-learning and other digital media, whether you are a buyer or producer.
William Horton Consulting (2001). Articles>Intellectual Property>Copyright
#18898
Science, Intellectual Property, and the Web
Many scientific journals have already moved to Web publication, but multiple concerns attend this conversion. In the past, publication in the sciences has assured that innovations and discoveries can be seen taking place along a continuum, each researcher building on the work of previous researchers. What effect does publishing on the Web and in other electronic forms have on this continuum? Three panelists – a technical-communications researcher, a scientific editor, and an engineering professor – address this question by considering the technological and other protections available to researchers. Scientific journals must also plan carefully for Web publication by allocating funds for protection and proper archiving.
Armbruster, David L., Hillary Hart and John A. Pearce. STC Proceedings (2002). Articles>Scientific Communication>Intellectual Property
#25268
The Second Enclosure Movement and the Construction of the Public Domain
We are in the middle of a second enclosure movement. It sounds grandiloquent to call it 'the enclosure of the intangible commons of the mind,' but in a very real sense that is just what it is. True, the new state-created property rights may be 'intellectual' rather than 'real,' but once again things that were formerly thought of as either common property or uncommodifiable are being covered with new, or newly extended, property rights. In this article, I try to develop the vocabulary and the analytic tools necessary to turn the tide of enclosure. I offer an historical sketch of various types of skepticism about intellectual property, from the antimonopolist criticisms of the Framers of the U.S. Constitution, through the emergence of affirmative arguments for the public domain, to the use of the language of the commons to defend the possibility of distributed methods of non-proprietary production. In many ways, it turns out, concepts of the public domain show the same variation in assumptions, and the same analytic differences, as the concept of property itself. I conclude by arguing that, for a number of reasons, the appropriate model for the change in thinking which I argue for comes from the history of the environmental movement. The invention of the concept of 'the environment' pulls together a string of otherwise disconnected issues, offers analytical insight into the blindness implicit in prior ways of thinking, and leads to perception of common interest where none was seen before. Like the environment, the public domain must be 'invented' before it is saved. Like the environment, like 'nature,' the public domain turns out to be a concept that is considerably more slippery than many of us realize. And, like the environment, the public domain nevertheless turns out to be useful, perhaps even necessary.
Boyle, James. Law and Contemporary Problems (2003). Articles>Intellectual Property>Copyright
#18859
The following set of links provide information on issues of copyright intellectual property, and fair use.
Galin, Jeffrey R. Kairos (1998). Articles>Intellectual Property>Copyright
#14480
Copyright protection for software can be a valuable tool. But how do you get that protection, how long does it last, and do you need a registration?
Hollander, Jay. GigaLaw.com (2000). Articles>Intellectual Property>Copyright>Software
#18658
Statement of Principles for the Management of Copyright in the Digital Environment
As the twin technologies of computing and telecommunications revolutionize the way in which knowledge and information is recorded, accessed, disseminated and stored, the modes of communication among scholars and researchers are changing rapidly. But just as these technologies can make possible the wide dissemination of copyright material that may violate the rights of the owner, so the technology can be used to prevent reasonable and necessary access to knowledge. Such access is essential to the generation of new knowledge. If access to information for research, teaching and study purposes is constrained, Canada's long-term economic and cultural growth will be hobbled.
University of Ottawa (2000). Articles>Intellectual Property>Copyright>Canada
#27094
What kind of textual evidence do courts now look at in light of the recent Grokster decision? What place does technical communication have in recent P2P court decisions? After examining the evidence courts have used from the Sony case to the Grokster case, the author argues that since texts generated and researched by technical communication have surfaced in P2P contexts as important evidentiary objects in court rulings (Napster, Aimster, Grokster), the field and its allies would do well to take notice. Using a lens of activity theory, the author argues that technical communication as a field can control its own future and ability to innovate by reseeing the texts that it creates, texts that are collected by courts as objects influencing determinations of the presence of intent to infringe (the current standard of liability in P2P contexts). With respect to legal liability, the best technical writing might be writing that stays invisible.
Rife, Martine Courant. Social Science Research Network (2006). Articles>Intellectual Property>Copyright>Technical Writing
#22272
The Technology of Rights: Digital Rights Management
Very briefly, thin copyright usually refers to a minimalist approach to copyright, giving works only as much protection as is needed to encourage creativity but with a goal of making works readily available to the public. Thick copyright is a more maximalist approach, and crudely put the goal of thick copyright is generally to maximize profits. We appear to be moving toward thick copyright, not only in this county but around the world in general. This movement is being spearheaded, as you might expect, by companies whose main product is in the form of intellectual property, such as books, movies and music. But there is yet another trend relating to the protection of intellectual property and that is the creation of technological controls to protect digital works. This is referred to as Digital Rights Management, or DRM. DRM is not a single technology and it is not even a single philosophy. It refers to a broad range of technologies and standards, many of which are still in the planning and development stage. DRM is not thin copyright, and it isn't even thick copyright; DRM is potentially a nearly absolute protection of works.
Coyle, Karen. Karen Coyle (2003). Articles>Intellectual Property>Copyright
#10595
Ten Copyright Permission Myths 
Is it OK to copy something if it doesn't have a copyright notice on it? What if only a small portion is copied, or if credit is given to the original creator? This article provides the sometimes-surprising truths behind these and many other common copyright myths.
Jassin, Lloyd J. GigaLaw.com (2000). Articles>Intellectual Property
#27123
Toward a New Politics of Intellectual Property
Until very recently, copyright has been on the periphery of law and public policy concerns because it provided highly technical rules to regulate a specialized industry. The politics of copyright largely focused on intra-industry bickering. The typical response of the legislature to such intra-industry struggles has been to propose that affected parties meet behind closed doors and hammer out compromise language that would thereafter become enacted into law. It didn’t matter much if the language negotiated in the heat of the night was incomprehensible (as has so often been the case) because the affected parties understood it, and that was all that mattered. Copyright law has, as a consequence, become highly complex and effectively unreadable. One reason why a new politics of intellectual property is necessary is that copyright now affects everyone.
Samuelson, Pamela. University of California Berkeley (2002). Articles>Intellectual Property>Copyright
#12939
Understanding Business Communication Copyright Laws
For some reason, there is a common misconception that correspondence and other forms of communication are not subject to protection by U.S. copyright laws; however, generally, that is not true. The U.S. Copyright Act states that protection exists 'in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.' Therefore, letters typically are protected by copyright law.
Isenberg, Doug. TECHWR-L (2000). Articles>Intellectual Property>Correspondence>Business Communication
#21666
This panel discussion is designed to help independent contractors understand some basic concepts of copyright protection. The panel will discuss the legal fundamentals of the copyright law and practical applications of the law. The panel will provide different perspectives from three points of view: an independent contractor, a technical writer who works for a large corporation, and a lawyer.
Costanzo, Louis C., Richard H. Weiss and Terry S. Dick. STC Proceedings (1996). Articles>Intellectual Property>Copyright
#10651
Generally, the 'year of first publication of the work' refers to the year in which the work (such as an instruction manual) was first distributed to the public. So, a manual written and distributed companywide in 1998 should obviously contain 1998 in the copyright notice. That's the easy example! But what about your question: What happens when the manual is revised? Interestingly, the Copyright Act doesn't directly say. But the commonly accepted practice is to include multiple years in the copyright notice, indicating the various years in which various material in the overall work was first published.
Isenberg, Doug. TECHWR-L (2000). Articles>Intellectual Property
#12940
According to the U.S. Lanham Act, a trademark is generally a 'word, name, symbol, or device, or combination thereof' that is used to 'identify and distinguish...goods, including a unique product, from those manufactured or sold by others and to indicate the source of the goods, even if that source is unknown.' Similarly, a service mark identifies and distinguishes services, rather than goods. Trademark infringement occurs when a person, without permission, uses another person's trademark or service mark in a commercial manner that is likely to cause confusion among the public. Trademark dilution, a less common legal violation, occurs when a person uses another person's famous trademark commercially without permission if doing so dilutes the distinctive quality of the trademark, even if there is no likelihood of confusion.
Isenberg, Doug. TECHWR-L (2000). Articles>Intellectual Property>Trademark
#12938
Using Parts of Another Company's Documentation to Supplement Your Company's Documentation
Although in some parts of life, as the saying goes, 'it's easier to ask forgiveness than to ask permission,' that's certainly not true in copyright law. It's very important to ask permission, because if you don't, you could be committing copyright infringement. In some instances, you may be able to use small portions of the other company's documentation without asking permission, under the 'fair use' doctrine of copyright law. However, this doctrine is highly fact-specific and often confusing; in other words, it's impossible to provide a blanket rule about how many paragraphs or words you can copy without violating the law.
Isenberg, Doug. TECHWR-L (2000). Articles>Intellectual Property>Copyright
#32025
This article investigates an instance in convergence culture: the conflicts and compromises between modders (fans of a video game who actually make changes to the game) and their supporters, and the owners of the copyrighted works they appropriate. I suggest that current copyright ownership in cultural products interferes with the way creative industries can benefit from convergence; that modders (and fans generally) develop a specific rationale and set of norms rooted in Jenkins' concept of a `moral economy' (Jenkins,
Postigo, Hector. Convergence (2008). Articles>Intellectual Property
#21501
Walking the Intellectual Property Law Labyrinth on Multimedia Projects
With the advent of new technology, we can quickly combine video, text, sound and other media in exciting ways. But, because of intellectual property laws, there can be limits to what we can do. In developing multimedia products, we need to be careful not to infringe on existing rights and patents. We can do this by discovering and documenting the origins of each work used in our products to ensure that we hold the appropriate rights. When we use works that weren’t created by our company, we need to work with company counsel to ensure that all requisite licenses, releases and other documents are obtained.
Doudnikoff, Gregory M. and Pamela S. Helyar. STC Proceedings (1994). Articles>Multimedia>Intellectual Property
#20577
Walking the Labyrinth of Multimedia Law 
Recommends discovering and documenting the origins of each work used in our products to ensure that we hold the appropriate rights. Advises working with counsel and contract negotiators to ensure that all requisite licenses, releases, and other documents are obtained.
Helyar, Pamela S. and Gregory M. Doudnikoff. Technical Communication Online (2003). Articles>Intellectual Property>Copyright>Multimedia
#30407
Web Design and the DMCA: Giving and Getting Take Down Notices
If you find yourself in the position of sending or receiving a Digital Millenium Copyright Act take-down notice, this informal checklist will help you get it right the first time.
Rutchik, Gregory. Digital Web Magazine (2007). Articles>Intellectual Property>Copyright
#10058
Web Site Framing: Trademark and Copyright Issues
Framing -- the common practice of displaying multiple web pages within a single Internet browser window -- has raised some interesting legal issues. For example, when one web site 'frames' another, the dominant site may inaccurately (and illegally) create an association between the two sites. This article explains the unsettled legal issues behind this technology.
Smith, Margaret Kubiszyn. GigaLaw.com (2001). Articles>Intellectual Property>Web Design
#10598
What is 'Fair Use' in Copyright Law?
Although U.S. copyright law generally makes it illegal to copy a work without permission, the 'fair use' doctrine permits some copying. But, what constitutes 'fair use' is often misunderstood, and the rules are not always easy to apply. This article explains the fair use doctrine and how it works.
Weil, Barbara Gall. GigaLaw.com (2000). Articles>Intellectual Property
