Copyright and the Designer: What you need to know to cover your ass and profit from your work

proposal

I propose to create a website devoted to explaining Canadian Intellectual Property law to designers. Most designers know almost nothing about IP, and more specifically, about copyright law. What they think they know is often wrong. It may be knowledge that is out of date, or about American copyright, or it may be popular and widely known "facts" that are simply not accurate or true. Whatever the case may be, Canadian designers are often ill-informed about Canadian IP and copyright law. It is becoming increasingly dangerous, in a digital age, to not know what we may or may not legally use, and how to protect our work from the unlawful use of others. It is also worth mentioning that we now have the tools to decide what the lawful uses of our work will be. My website will explore all of these issues.

Canadian designers are ill-informed about copyright and IP?

Yes. Sadly, they are. That is, of course, a striking generalization, but it's a reasonably true one. For one thing, no one teaches us about it. We get theory, we get technical instruction, but by and large, there is a lack of ethical and legal training available for those studying to become designers. Copyright, patents, and other IP protections are often taken care of for us by the company employing the designer. There are two major problems with that system. For one, the company does not always have the best interests of the designer in mind. This often means that designers end up not owning their copyrights. The other issue is that, increasingly, the designer is the company. In this case, there's the potential for less exploitation, but there is also the potential for copyright infringement (both by and of the designer) if the designer does not know enough about the applicable laws.

How do you propose to explain IP and copyright law to designers?

Using very short words. Kidding, of course. I intend to explain using useful and topical examples, as well as a pair of personable intermediaries: Lawbot and Copycat. Lawbot is the personification of copyright and IP law, whereas Copycat represents someone who is uneducated about those laws. It may seem a bit gimmicky, but these two characters are meant to make a dry subject slightly more approachable, manageable, and (yes, I'm going there) adorable. Robots are awesome, and a well designed, beautifully executed website is far more likely to appeal to visual people than the stodgy and frankly disgusting sites that the Department of Justice and other government agencies have.

Cartoon robots are supposed to make copyright interesting? Isn't that a bit shallow?

Granted, it is shallow. The problem is, though, that a visually rich, interactive website is more appealing and engaging than text-only. Unfortunately, there aren't many graphics that relate directly to copyright and IP law. Those that do exist are seriously played out and clicheed. Plus, robots make excellent impartial instructors. They have no feelings, so it's easier to view them as neutral parties. And that's important if information is meant to be presented in a non-biased way. Anyway, the robot isn't the only thing that's supposed to make copyright fun. What makes it fun is that Lawbot and Copycat present problems and questions to the user, who then has to determine (out of a list) which answer or solution is the most appropriate. It may be a question on how long copyright lasts in Canada (it depends, although for written works, fifty years after the death of the author [CIPPIC]), or it could be a scenario about fair dealing (which is not the same as fair use).

What do you plan to explain to these alleged designers?

In short, I plan to explain the basics of Canadian copyright and IP law. In more involved terms, the website will explore how copyright works, what it protects, what protects IP that isn't copyrightable, what fair dealing covers, how long copyright lasts, the Berne Convention and international copyright, the public domain, copyright on the internet, and alternatives to traditional copyright.

Explain more about the robot. I'm fascinated.

Lawbot will essentially be the user's guide to copyright law. The user is charged with the task of solving Copycat's problems, and Lawbot exists to be a sort of referee. The user has to choose the right answers to the questions that Copycat poses. Lawbot then elaborates on the answer (whether the user was right or wrong), giving context, history, precedent, differences between Canadian and American law, etc. There will also be a bit where, if you so choose, you can skip the game and just get the information. Also, a resources page.

These tools that you mentioned... For protecting work. Explain.

An important function of the site will be to show designers how to protect their work, but still be able to contribute to society. One of the problems with overly restrictive copyright is that it stops anyone but the copyright holder from using the work that is being protected. However, alternatives exist to the traditional, all rights reserved copyright. Lawbot (with the co-operation of copycat and the user) will explain what the alternatives are, what purposes they serve, what rights they give to the public, and under which circumstances they can or should be used.

Here's hoping that designers can learn to enjoy being quizzed about copyright law by a robot.