Figuring out if the content you want to use was legally posted online can be difficult. That said, there are a few things to keep in mind when assessing content that will help you make a more informed decision. If you are having difficulty figuring out if the content you want to use is a legal copy, please contact us at copyright@uwaterloo.ca.
Keep the following in mind
- If it looks too good to be true, it probably is. For example, if you find an entire documentary uploaded to YouTube by an individual user (not by the production company that owns the documentary), or an entire textbook uploaded to an individual’s blog, it’s almost certainly not a legal copy. The copyright owner would have had to give permission for the content to be posted that way, and in these cases there is no motivation for them to do so since it would completely negate the need for people to purchase the content from a more legitimate source.
- What website was it posted on? What is that website's reputation? If the content is posted on a reputable website, it is more likely to be legal content. For example, if content is posted on the website of a newspaper (such as the Globe and Mail), it is more likely to be legitimate content than if it is reposted on an individual’s blog, unless it is accompanied by a statement indicating that material reappears with the permission of the copyright holder. Be more cautious with sites that allow users to upload content, since many users do not understand the copyright implications of posting content without permission. A good rule of thumb is to go to the source whenever possible: for example, when looking for a copy of a news broadcast, go directly to the news organization's page, or to its account on the platform you are using (e.g. YouTube).
-
Who
posted
the
content? Who
is
the
copyright
owner
of
the
content? If
content
has
been
posted
by
the
copyright
owner
(a
BBC
news
broadcast
on
the
BBC
YouTube
account;
an
image
posted
in
the
photographer's
digital
portfolio),
then
that
content
can
be
considered
legal.
If
content
has
been
posted
by
someone
other
than
the
copyright
owner
and
a
credit
line
is
visible
(a
photograph
in
a
news
story,
an
article
reprinted
from
another
source),
then
that
content
can
likewise
be
considered
legal.
If,
however,
material
has
been
posted/duplicated
online
and
there
is
no
clear
connection
between
the
uploader
and
the
copyright
holder
(e.g.
a
YouTube
video
of
movie
clips
posted
by
an
individual
fan;
a
text
available
as
a
scanned
PDF
on
an
individual
reader's
website),
it
is
unlikely
to
be
a
legal
copHave
a
look
at
who
posted
the
content,
and
think
about
how
likely
they
were
to
have
permission
to
post
the
content.
For
example,
if
they
are
the
copyright
owner,
they
don’t
need
permission,
if
they
are
the
creator
of
the
work
they
are
more
likely
to
have
permission
or
be
the
owner.
Here
are
a
couple
examples:
- A video of a BBC news broadcast is more likely to be a legitimate copy if it was posted by the official BBC account on YouTube, than if it was posted by JaneSchmoe1984.
- An image posted on a photographer’s digital portfolio is more likely to be a legitimate image than a copy found on another individual’s blog.
- What attribution or permission statement is present? If content is posted on a website and it is unlikely that the website owner is the copyright owner, look for an attribution statement that indicates that permission was sought to use the content (e.g. “Image posted with permission of Photographer X" or "Reprinted with permission of the author"). You may also find that content posted by the copyright owner appears with a disclaimer about the terms of use or copyright statement for the content.
If you've gone through these tips and are having trouble determining if the content you wish to use was legally posted, please send an email copyright@uwaterloo.ca.