Ed bloggers (here unnamed) have latched on to a School Library Journal article suggesting educators often unnecessarily limit themselves (and their students) with a conservative interpretation of fair use.
Fear and guilt seemed regularly in the way of innovative teaching and creative expression.
While I am not a lawyer (anyone who comments on copyright says this, so I will too), but I have written on the issues of copyright and fair use as these issues relate to student created multimedia in our books for future educators. I am likely one of those people who takes a conservative position based on my reading of the law and the participatory activities I feel are of greatest educational value.
The “take a more liberal few of fair use” seems to focus on promoting the value of transformation as unique expression.
What I would like to see are classroom examples arguing for the need for “mix-up, mash-up” projects. I want such examples so I can ask myself and others whether such projects would really be the best choice for engaging students. Why not focus on projects that require students to create their own content from scratch – take your own pictures, write your own prose? Why not share resources with other classrooms if location is an issue? I am not suggesting that it would be impossible to create a scenario in which repurposing the work of another might be necessary, but I am thinking such situations would be extremely rare and creative opportunities by their nature are basically unlimited.
I think a more significant issue is the confusion articles such as the Library Journal create. Will educators read the article carefully enough to inform their practice? Is the article informative enough to inform practice? Will the impression that others are doing it serve as an excuse? Are Grateful Dead concert posters really cultural history? Will people who advocate mash-ups as good education understand what the previous question meant?
