The copyright act allows creators to have rights and control over who can use their work, this includes a multitude of media. Thus, they must be credited to all of their work (usually in money) that is used in someone else’s work or can only be used by the person who holds the right to their work. This makes sense because if you create a masterpiece that changes someone’s idea of something, you would not want to have some Joe-Shmoe taking credit for your work. They can be now be charged with plagiarism if they use something that is not theirs and does not credit the original publisher.
The “fair use” doctrine is basically the legal ability to be able to use someone else’s work, even if it is copyrighted, if it is being used to create something new and will be useful, such as a non-profit organization commercial or ad. Thus, the work of the other person must be manipulated enough that it is completely different than the original work. For this, you do not have to ask for the permission of the original own, hence the name “fair use”, almost like “fair game”. I feel like there is a lot of grey area in this doctrine because it’s hard to determine if it would necessarily be okay or not. I feel like for me personally, I would just cover my butt by crediting the work to the original owner, just so something legal doesn’t arise.
The idea of copyright commons, is to have many of the same rights as the copyright law but also allow people to use their work for creative reasons, giving people access to their work. It is basically a type of license that one can get for their work so it is protected but it also has space for people to be able to use it as a non-profit type deal. I think this is interesting because not everyone can pay for a lot of copyrighted work so the fact that some people will allow their work to be used is really neat and is doing a favor to people like us who are using it for educational purposes.
I think the digital age has made it a lot easier to steal people’s work because of the simple copying and pasting and the fact that everything is at our fingertips. It is also a lot more ambiguous as to what can or cannot be used from the internet, especially when you go to google and select images, it is easy to pick a photo you like and copy it and paste without thinking twice. For my work, I haven’t really thought of the fact that other people have access to it. I feel like it’s also not something I would feel the need to have to spend money to have a license to protect my work. Perhaps if I had super intense ideas that I was super proud of and didn’t want anyone else to take, I would go the extra length to protect them but for now, I’m okay with anyone using my work in moderation to help create their works.. a little accreditation wouldn’t hurt though!