Media Law: Copyright

Ever since the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988, intellectual property has been protected from being used without permission. Over twenty years on, there is little material in the public domain that is not protected somehow by copyright.

Everything from books to films and from music to photographs that is original work has a copyright logo slapped on it somewhere. From a journalist's point of view, copyright gives them their license to write without danger of a story being stolen. On the other hand, it means that in order to do certain types of stories, copyright royalties can prove to be a right royal pain in the backside. Any music or footage owned and copyrighted by someone else must be legally bought and paid for, leaving the rightful owners with cartoon-like pound signs over their eyes as they imagine the money rolling in.

The value of a product rises due to its exclusivity. For example, the shots of Jonny Wilkinson's winning drop-goal against Australia in the 2003 Rugby World Cup Final is worth an awful lot of money purely because ITV had the exclusive rights to the tournament therefore affording them exclusive rights to footage of one of the most iconic images in English sport in the early part of the 21st Century.

Sports coverage is in fact one of the main danger areas of copyright, along with material from the internet and sites like YouTube. This is simply a nightmare for journalists: although classed as 'in the public domain' there are still strict copyright laws surrounding these areas making them a legal minefield. Photographs and film archive are also dangerous for journalists.

Despite the doom and gloom surrounding copyright, the issue of 'Fair Dealing' allows journalists to effectively 'lift' material from their rivals. This is only classed as fair dealing if a)the story is in the public interest, b)it is attributed and c)most importantly, it is 'fair'. As long as the main thrust of the story and quotes are accurate then a journalist can get away with fair dealing.

Crucially, this allows the wider reporting of news. Finally, it is acceptable to use footage/audio for criticism or review purposes providing someone talks over the top of it and if a famous celebrity dies, then it is also acceptable to use well-known clips from their career.