View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Smithington
Joined: 14 Dec 2011
|
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 9:12 pm Post subject: Intellectual theft in Korea - The Economist strikes back. |
|
|
Seems The Economist, the British news magazine, is really pissed at a Gangnam hagwon for repeatedly copying its articles without permission. It's decided to sue. I'm guessing the successful Apple suit against Samsung has opened wide the door for other lawsuits against unethical commercial practices in Korea.
The hagwon's defence: "This is common practice in Korea."
This courtesy of the Marmot's Hole.
http://www.rjkoehler.com/2013/01/23/the-economist-sues-famous-gangnam-language-school-report/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ttompatz
Joined: 05 Sep 2005 Location: Kwangju, South Korea
|
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
... fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
Should certainly be interesting but I won't bet in favor of the Economist.
. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
NYC_Gal 2.0
Joined: 10 Dec 2010
|
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hagwons are businesses, not schools. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ttompatz
Joined: 05 Sep 2005 Location: Kwangju, South Korea
|
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 10:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
NYC_Gal 2.0 wrote: |
Hagwons are businesses, not schools. |
doesn't say "school".
Teaching and classroom .... and they are licensed to teach under the authority of the ministry of education (MOE) and have classrooms.
Should be an interesting squabble but I won't bet against the hagwon just yet.
. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Los Angeloser
Joined: 26 Aug 2010 Location: Korea
|
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 10:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ttompatz wrote: |
... fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
Should certainly be interesting but I won't bet in favor of the Economist.
. |
I don't know what evidence/witness(es) The Economist has but the hagwon admitted it and by your red words in bold they sound guilty. I'd agree that the hagwon is in S. Korea as is the court so I'd say the odds are against The Economist. Did this OP work there? Go to last page(4) and see my comment.
http://forums.eslcafe.com/korea/viewtopic.php?t=212706 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
actionjackson
Joined: 30 Dec 2007 Location: Any place I'm at
|
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ttompatz wrote: |
... fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
Should certainly be interesting but I won't bet in favor of the Economist.
. |
But couldn't it be argued that they made copies for financial gain? Which is essentially what they were doing and not making copies for class discussions.
Quote: |
The language school admits using the materials but said it is not fair that it was singled out as the offender. A staffer told the Chosun Ilbo in a phone interview, "We printed and used the Economist�s articles without permission to teach our highest level students and sold teaching materials containing those articles." But the staffer claimed that is no more than any other language institute in Korea does. |
Best defense ever! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
robot
Joined: 07 Mar 2006
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 1:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Would love the name of the hagwon, if any insider would care to PM. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
repeatpete
Joined: 24 Oct 2010
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think the focus was the use of copied Economist articles in a textbook by the hagwon in question which was then sold to students.
According to the English version of the article, they have about 20,000 students.
Fair use for educational purposes would usually be inferred as making a few photocopies for discussion or personal research. Not enough just in case the Mormon tabernacle choir pops round.
Taking someone else's work, packaging it as your own and then selling it as a textbook.
I would defer to ttompatz in a heartbeat but this seems to be stretching the term 'fair use' to breaking point. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ttompatz
Joined: 05 Sep 2005 Location: Kwangju, South Korea
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
repeatpete wrote: |
I think the focus was the use of copied Economist articles in a textbook by the hagwon in question which was then sold to students.
According to the English version of the article, they have about 20,000 students.
Fair use for educational purposes would usually be inferred as making a few photocopies for discussion or personal research. Not enough just in case the Mormon tabernacle choir pops round.
Taking someone else's work, packaging it as your own and then selling it as a textbook.
I would defer to ttompatz in a heartbeat but this seems to be stretching the term 'fair use' to breaking point. |
I would almost agree had they taken articles alone and published them or copied a magazine and published it for profit.
Including pieces of a few columns (even as many as 54 over the course of a few years) as examples in a text book used strictly in-house would, I think, constitute and be covered under "fair use".
Had they been sold open market (in books that the general public could buy in a book store - a point not indicated in the article) then it would have been a different matter.
. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
liveinkorea316
Joined: 20 Aug 2010 Location: South Korea
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Workshops outside all universities illegally copy course books by the thousands. It is their bread and butter. It is what the Hanson was mentioning. They would advicse the required text book for one of their classes and no sooner would only one or two students buy it and the remaining 13 in the class turn up wit black and white printed copies from the copy centre over the road for a third the cost.
The school is to be applauded for developing and putting together a textbook for their students but they did not write the articles and they indirectly make plenty of $$$$ off selling the book given they are a Hagwon in Gangnam otherwise The Economist wouldn't be pursuing this.
Stealing is stealing. As far as I am aware intellectual property rights were in both the US-FTA andthe EU-FTA.
Fair use exemption for teachers is for teaching and classroom use. Not publishing a textbook and putting your name on it. I believe you will find that when the details come out it will not be just some conscious teachers' materials. It was blatant stealing. Samsung style.
I am not saying they will get successfully prosecuted however. This IS Korea. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
augustine
Joined: 08 Sep 2012 Location: México
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
These are kids we're talking about, right? As a former subscriber to The Economist, I have trouble believing the concept that even the most elite Korean kids could have comprehended much, if anything, written in that publication. Must be one hell of a hagwon. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
NYC_Gal 2.0
Joined: 10 Dec 2010
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ah I don't know where it is, but I used to do photo research for a magazine, and there's a "for profit" clause that says that (paraphrasing) if it is for profit, it is not categorized as education. I'm sorry, but I haven't done that kind of work in years, so don't have the websites linked anywhere. I'd be interested in rules have changed, though. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ttompatz
Joined: 05 Sep 2005 Location: Kwangju, South Korea
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
NYC_Gal 2.0 wrote: |
Ah I don't know where it is, but I used to do photo research for a magazine, and there's a "for profit" clause that says that (paraphrasing) if it is for profit, it is not categorized as education. I'm sorry, but I haven't done that kind of work in years, so don't have the websites linked anywhere. I'd be interested in rules have changed, though. |
Again, as I posted earlier (and there is no suggestion either way in the article):
IF the textbook had been sold "open market" (you could go to an outside bookstore and buy a copy even if you weren't a student at the hagwon) then fair use does not apply.
IF the "textbook" was strictly used "in house" in a properly licensed (by the MOE) educational institution (which is what most legal hagwons are) then fair use probably applies.
. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I guess, in that sense, it's how the hogwons are viewed. Are they a business, or a school? If they're both, how does it apply? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
goreality
Joined: 09 Jul 2009
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm going to speculate that the Economist has more experience than ABC hagwon regarding international copyright law (funny one was named but not the other).
I am guessing they would not be attempting this case if it would be easily dismissed as educational needs.
They have discovered that the hagwon has often used their articles without proper compensation in published textbook. Lots of hagwons sell their material online and in bookstore to non students. Nearly all the unigwons, Ganada and YMB are two I can think of off hand.
If the hagwon was using the name Economist to lure paying customers (or 'students') and not just their articles, rights were definitely infringed on.
The fact that the everyone does it excuse was used is interesting. I read an article yesterday about how Korean tourists are encouraged to report uses of Korean copyright infringement in South East Asia....interesting that when the tables are turned the excuse is simply everyone does it. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|