John

Do most schools have a clear policy on how teachers and students can use artwork in the classroom while staying within Fair Use guidelines? When it comes to the Web, do schools even try to comply, or do they mainly look the other way?

Here's a sample set of usage guidelines, published by the University of Maryland. Referring to image use, the specific guidelines are:
* no more than five images from one artist or photographer
* no more than 10% or 15 images, whichever is less, from a collection
http://www.umuc.edu/library/copy.shtml

Unregistered

Greetings John and all,

Art teachers are becoming more aware of Fair Use guidelines. This is a popular topic on the art education list serves. I would not say the "most schools" have a policy. I think more and more are requiring teachers to be knowledgeable on the topic. Some are having in-service training. Teachers are requiring students to document their sources in presentations. More and more teachers do not permit students to use photographs when creating art (unless they took the photographs). Derived art and appropriated art are part of the vocabulary in the classroom.

Years ago teachers claimed "Fair use" for any and all educational uses.
Now they are realizing there are limitations.

Dr. Craig Roland has written a very good article on this topic:
http://www.artjunction.org/atgi/teac...ght_sites.html

Regards,

Judy Decker

Judy Decker

Greetings John and all,

I noticed that there wasn't an icon next to the CGFA link on a page I browsed.

Carol Gerten Fine Art does allow personal and educational use of images.

Her terms of use are listed in the FAQ page.
http://cgfa.sunsite.dk/faq.htm

From the site:

I do not mind if you use some of my scans at your site as long as you follow these rules:

1) Only use UP TO 10 scans.
2) Always give me a name credit AND a link (The main thing keeping this site on the web are my advertising banners located at the top of the pages. If people don't visit my site and the banners don't load then how can I afford to keep updating the site?).
3) Load the scans onto your own server, DO NOT link directly to mine.
4) I do not have the authority to give you permission to use these scans on a commercial site.
5) I would prefer my scans not be posted at newsgroups.

You may print and use these scans free for any reasons as long as it's not commercial. I cannot give permission to use these scans for commercial purposes.
-------------------------------------------
If one follows the letter of the law, I don't think she can really give permission to publish the images on any web site (unless the original work has fallen into public domain). Now that her site has all of this advertising on it, I question whether her use is Fair Use. I think she has every form of advertising available to her. I know she has had to remove some artists' works from her site as a result.

Thanks for bringing this topic to Artcyclopedia. Teachers will find the terms of use links helpful. I know many don't take the time to check the terms of use on sites.

Regards,

Judy Decker

Judy Decker

Greetings John and All,

I noticed the Olga's Gallery claims "All Rights Reserved".
http://www.abcgallery.com/

I have written to the site and have requested that they add a terms of use for educators.

They can not claim "All Rights Reserved" as I assume they are claiming "Fair Use" as the rationale for including the works on Olga's Gallery.

I will let you know what I find out. That site has full of advertising now. It is not a "non-profit site". They have every form of advertising available now on the site.

Regards,

Judy Decker

John

Just to clarify the algorithmic process I've been using...

Carol Gerten's site will have an image use icon next to it, unless the artist has passed away in the past 70 years. In these cases the artist would generally speaking have copyright protection regardless of whether CGFA asserts its own rights as creator of the scans. This doesn't precisely correspond with copyright law, which varies from country to country and invariably has a variety of inclusions and exclusions, but it's the rule of thumb I've been using to try to minimize misunderstandings.

The only site that will have an image use icon for artists who have passed away less than 70 years ago is Wikimedia. That's because they are quite careful to document the exact basis for the image being available for use (and "fair use" isn't a reason they accept). For example they have a number of Ansel Adams photographs which were taken on behalf of the US National Parks Service; as publications of the US government they are ineligible for copyright.

Unregistered

Olga's Gallery just added Frida Kahlo to their website. However, Frida Kahlo's work is still in copyright as she died in 1954, so how come Olga's Gallery can display her work, and also display all those advertisements (banners / google ads / sponsorship links)? Does the website get special permission to display the scans, or does it pay to license the photos from Corbis or Bridgeman etc? I'm curious because this website is obviously commercial now. Thanks in advance for any insight.

Unregistered

p.s. ditto for the Art Renewal Center - they have a big splash of Google ads now on their homepage. But again, i was under the assumption that they're "non-profit".

John

The ARC is registered as "a 501(C)(3) Educational Foundation". I'm not in the US so I don't know the ins and outs of what that means, but in any case the nature of the use is merely one consideration when determining "fair use". Non-profit use doesn't automatically qualify, and for-profit use isn't automatically prohibited.

Anyway cracking down on image use isn't really the direction I think we should be going in. The reasonable and faithful use of art images to discuss an artist's work is self-evidently beneficial to that artist's career and legacy. What professional artist really doesn't want people to be aware of their work? In an auction, which is going to sell for more -- the famous work which has become a cultural icon, or the equally-competent work that nobody knows by the same artist?

The same basic principle applies with museums, and this is why I am constantly promoting and congratulating the museums with the best online imagery. Even though the famous works of the Louvre, the Met, or the Sistine Chapel have been reproduced to the point of ubiquity, people are still anxious to travel literally around the world to see them in person. A great reproduction of a great work is the best advertising a museum can possibly have.