So, I have not watched an episode of Project Runway since Christian Siriano won in season 4.
Photo Credit to bgwilson89 at flickr.
However, someone alerted me to a copyright infringement that took place during the season finale.
One of the contestants took material from New York Magazine, word for word, changed the typography, and then put it on shirts meant for her “final collection” at fashion week.
When producers realized that she had used copyrighted material, they forced her to change the imagery.
Here’s a blog post that summarizes the various copyright disputes that popped up during the two-part Finale episode:
http://projectrungay.blogspot.com/2009/11/controversy-spoilerish.html
The words she used on her clothing were lifted from NY Magazine:
http://nymag.com/news/articles/reasonstoloveny/2008/
(Honestly, she couldn’t come up with her own reasons to love NY? There are so many of them!)
NY Magazine’s reaction:
http://nymag.com/daily/fashion/2009/11/irinas_project_runway_shirt_kn.html
I have to echo one of the comments on the NYMagazine blog.
Did she really think no one would notice? She would be on national television, and her design would be seen by millions. Also, NY Magazine obsessively blogs about Project Runway and would definitely see the design sooner or later.
Is this a case of not being aware of copyright law? Or did she deliberately take the words and images out of desperation?
This brings me to another question:
Do we need to teach people about copyright law?
I don’t know about you guys, but all I ever learned in “computer class” (aka Oregon Trail time in school) was to make sure that information was correct and links were reputable. We never learned about attribution, or copyright infringement, or what copyright really means.
You’re reading this blog because you are interested in copyright law. Does the average layperson really need to know about copyright?
We all learned not to plagiarize, but why did we never learn about copyright or fair use? We learned about MLA citations for terms papers, but we are not told how to cite people’s photographs online.
Is copyright law just the next logical step in teaching people how to be more Internet savvy and media literate?
Some Rights Reserved
I really liked this post!
First of all, while it is blatantly clear Irina DID copy (word-for-word) the reasons to love NY, it seems (and I haven’t watched the episode either), that she probably had no idea she wasn’t allowed to do that. Or maybe I’m being too generous and OF COURSE she knew, especially since she was just called out for using a trademarked image originally.
Either way, your point about teaching copyright is really important. Claiming ignorance just doesn’t seem like a reasonable excuse in today’s world or in our grandparents’ heyday. It seems commonsensical that lifting someone’s execution of an idea and putting your name on it is wrong. Do we need to teach that to people? The nuances of copyright law are fuzzier, and should be taught in the same way we are “taught,” semester after semester, that plagiarizing is so terrible.
@elizabeth
“The nuances of copyright law are fuzzier, and should be taught in the same way we are “taught,” semester after semester, that plagiarizing is so terrible.”
I agree with this so much! Students have to sign actual documents stating that they are aware that plagiarism is grounds for failing grades on essays. However, students are never made aware of the tools they can use to properly credit other people’s work or where they can find suitable material for their own use. Where does the disconnect lie?
I agree with Elizabeth in that copyright law must be taught in schools beginning at the same age we currently teach about plagiarism, because from an increasing younger age, students submit various media projects to their teachers, such as mini documentaries or their own start-up blog, as an alternative to papers. Failing to “correct” infringing behavior at a young age could lead to problems later on in their professional careers. Digital media classes are becoming common in American high schools, and I’m sure that use of copyrighted work is frequent. But explaining copyright law, let alone fair use, to a young teenager proves to be challenging. I’ve noticed this with my own sister who is a producer of her high school’s monthly newscast which airs on a local public access channel. She and her friends often use footage from local and national newscasts that they find on YouTube in the B-roll of their segments or take information from news articles they find online to use in their scripts without doing much to change the way the information is expressed. I’ve pointed this out to her, but she doesn’t seem to care since the rest of the cast will continue to do the same. It seems that these uses fall under fair use, not withstanding the fact that copyright holders probably would risk harm to their reputation if they sued a bunch of high school kids. Nevertheless, I still find it problematic that my sister’s teacher hasn’t discussed potential copyright issues with the show’s cast, especially considering that the course is actually ideally suited to teach kids about fair use; such lessons would likely stimulate further creativity and lead to greater amateur journalism.