User-generated content and the law

Creating music often involves borrowing from preexisting sources. Copyright law applies to a range of common borrowing practices including sampling, remixing, linking, and creating user-generated content for online platforms. When analyzing musical borrowing, it is important to first establish what aspects of musical creativity copyright does and does not protect. A series of cases illustrate when the law identifies borrowing of unprotected aspects of prior works, such as musical ideas, common melodic sequences, and chord progressions. Other cases illustrate how the law also permits some borrowing of protected expression if the borrowing is fair use. Digital technology facilitates musical borrowing, and certain online practices such as posting hyperlinks to other musical sources are permitted unless the person posting the links knows that the link leads to infringing material, intends to encourage others to infringe or meets other requirements for secondary liability for copyright infringement.

Download Full-text

Knowledge Curation

10.31228/osf.io/3h4ts ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Michael J Madison

Keyword(s):

Intellectual Property ◽

User Generated Content ◽

Legal Rights ◽

Cultural Environment ◽

Property Law ◽

New Knowledge ◽

Different Types ◽

The Law ◽

Creativity And Innovation ◽

Do So

This Article addresses conservation, preservation, and stewardship of knowledge, and laws and institutions in the cultural environment that support those things. Legal and policy questions concerning creativity and innovation usually focus on producing new knowledge and offering access to it. Equivalent attention rarely is paid to questions of old knowledge. To what extent should the law, and particularly intellectual property law, focus on the durability of information and knowledge? To what extent does the law do so already, and to what effect? This article begins to explore those questions. Along the way, the article takes up distinctions among different types of creativity and knowledge, from scholarship and research to commercial entertainment and so-called “User Generated Content”; distinctions among objects, works of authorship, and legal rights accompanying both; distinctions among creations built to last (sometimes called “sustained” works), creations built for speed (including “ephemeral” works), and creations barely built at all (works closely tied to the authorial “self”); and distinctions between analog and digital contexts.

Download Full-text

Ethical Challenges: Less About Moral Wrongdoing and More About Communication Breakdown

Perspectives on Gerontology ◽

10.1044/gero20.3.72 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 20 (3) ◽

pp. 72-84 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Paula Leslie ◽

Mary Casper

Keyword(s):

Ethical Challenges ◽

Speech Language Pathology ◽

Thickened Liquids ◽

Communication Breakdown ◽

Professional Duty ◽

Language Pathology ◽

The Law ◽

Personal Case

“My patient refuses thickened liquids, should I discharge them from my caseload?” A version of this question appears at least weekly on the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association's Community pages. People talk of respecting the patient's right to be non-compliant with speech-language pathology recommendations. We challenge use of the word “respect” and calling a patient “non-compliant” in the same sentence: does use of the latter term preclude the former? In this article we will share our reflections on why we are interested in these so called “ethical challenges” from a personal case level to what our professional duty requires of us. Our proposal is that the problems that we encounter are less to do with ethical or moral puzzles and usually due to inadequate communication. We will outline resources that clinicians may use to support their work from what seems to be a straightforward case to those that are mired in complexity. And we will tackle fears and facts regarding litigation and the law.

Download Full-text