LTT Education??

[Skeletor_118]

Okay so I'm at college and I have a friend that is in a computer literacy course and I happened to glance at a video she was watching for the course... It was a Techquickie video with Linus talking about more basic stuff about computers! The thing is, it was not through YouTube, but a program called SAM from Cengage. I knew he was a great source of information but I never realized he actually had his videos used for education.

I actually did a few google searches and found nothing talking about them working together so I'm actually not even sure if it was done with permission.. Would that even be legal, given that the program the videos are being used in is a for-profit learning tool? I may just not be looking in the right places, or it may be that it's perfectly legal, but I wasn't sure, and I figured I could bring it up within the community in case nobody else was aware.

[Ja Krispie]

If they didn't ask permission nor was it given then it would be illegal for them to use them and make money from it.

[JohnDongus]

18 minutes ago, Psybadek said:

If they didn't ask permission nor was it given then it would be illegal for them to use them and make money from it.

Pretty sure using things like that for educational purposes is exempt 

[reniat]

5 minutes ago, JohnDongus said:

Pretty sure using things like that for educational purposes is exempt 

I'm by no means a lawyer, but that doesn't sounds right

[Brooksie359]

17 minutes ago, JohnDongus said:

Pretty sure using things like that for educational purposes is exempt 

Yep and that is why textbooks are free right? Oh wait you have to pay for educational materials.... 

[Ja Krispie]

18 minutes ago, JohnDongus said:

Pretty sure using things like that for educational purposes is exempt 

If they wanted to link it on their site back to his youtube channel then sure. But if they have it on their own site and are charging for it then no, they can't do that since it's the intellectual property rights of LMG

[Andreas Lilja]

Pretty sure that's fair use.

[KhandakeF]

6 minutes ago, Psybadek said:

If they wanted to link it on their site back to his youtube channel then sure. But if they have it on their own site and are charging for it then no, they can't do that since it's the intellectual property rights of LMG

yeah you have to pay for Cengage, individually for each thing or get everything on the site for 119$ for one semester

[Skeletor_118]

9 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

Yep and that is why textbooks are free right? Oh wait you have to pay for educational materials.... 

We pay so much for textbooks and all because the people making the books use copyrighted material, which requires them to pay to be allowed to use it. I actually had an English teacher last semester that got around this by simply entering in the URL for short stories into the book for us to type out. Doing this, she made the book not only much thinner and use less paper, but she reduced the cost of making it, which allowed the book to only cost the students $88, as opposed to what could have easily been ~$200.

[Imbellis]

Just now, Raskolnikov said:

Pretty sure that's fair use.

While if it's used educationally contributes to the final decision, That doesn't solely make it fair use.

There are many other factors such as the effects on profit, if the educational source is charging for it, the quantity used, and the type of work (if it's factual or not).T

While I personally think it would fall under fair use, I think that they should be made aware (And perhaps Jon). @LinusTech @CPotter

[reniat]

41 minutes ago, Imbellis said:

While I personally think it would fall under fair use

I think it's pretty hard to say without seeing it. If it's just ripped video TQ videos being used without the context of youtube and withouit LMG's permission, that's pretty likely not under fair use. Here are some major factors against:

 

entire work copied (though this is an assumption given what we know)

cengage isn't a non-profit institution

Multiple use and large public audience

systematic and continuing

[Ja Krispie]

1 hour ago, Raskolnikov said:

Pretty sure that's fair use.

Fair use doesn't mean take the entirety of the video and profit from it. That's not at all how it works. If you're taking samples from it kind of like how people review music/movies then yes that would be fair use.

[BuckGup]

1 hour ago, Skeletor_118 said:

We pay so much for textbooks and all because the people making the books use copyrighted material, which requires them to pay to be allowed to use it. I actually had an English teacher last semester that got around this by simply entering in the URL for short stories into the book for us to type out. Doing this, she made the book not only much thinner and use less paper, but she reduced the cost of making it, which allowed the book to only cost the students $88, as opposed to what could have easily been ~$200.

Yeah but the piratebay exists

[Skeletor_118]

Regarding whether or not the entire video was ripped from TQ, I'm not entirely sure about that, as I wasn't the one watching the videos. I'm also not sure if there is more than one being used.

All I know is that the video my friend was watching was definitely not being streamed from YouTube, and that it was just under 6 minutes long, which would make sense for a TQ video. I'll ask them to let me know if there's more TQ videos on the platform that she sees, and whether or not it's the entire video or just a segment.

[Vandorlot]

Education usually makes it fair use. This actually occurs a lot, my highschool computer science class, and 2 other high schools that I know of, used multiple techquike videos for educational purposes. However since it isn't through youtube that makes it a different story. Since the program SAM costs money and it doesn't reference the channel this does make it not fair use.

[Canada EH]

23 hours ago, JohnDongus said:

Pretty sure using things like that for educational purposes is exempt 

You are right there/

23 hours ago, reniat said:

I'm by no means a lawyer, but that doesn't sounds right

Libraries are allowed to photocopy books, even though books are copyrighted, for educational purposes.

[Ja Krispie]

2 minutes ago, Canada EH said:

You are right there/

Libraries are allowed to photocopy books, even though books are copyrighted, for educational purposes.

ibraries arent allowed to copy every single page word for word and then distribute it. Copying certain pages is allowed.

2 hours ago, Vandorlot said:

Education usually makes it fair use. This actually occurs a lot, my highschool computer science class, and 2 other high schools that I know of, used multiple techquike videos for educational purposes. However since it isn't through youtube that makes it a different story. Since the program SAM costs money and it doesn't reference the channel this does make it not fair use.

I don't even think just showing the videos from their channel in a classroom would need or apply with fair use. If you're showing it from their channel then there isn't anything illegal since the original source is used and not being used for profit, unlike SAM as you stated.

[Kamjam66xx]

23 hours ago, reniat said:

I'm by no means a lawyer, but that doesn't sounds right

 I downloaded copies of programs that technically werent sold anymore, in part files, and used them for educational purposes. Its stupidly broad. 

 

But... since theyre making money, ya idk

 

[Canada EH]

Just now, Psybadek said:

ibraries arent allowed to copy every single page word for word and then distribute it. Copying certain pages is allowed.

You'd have to read up on that, but you'd be allowed to do every single page.

[Ja Krispie]

1 minute ago, Canada EH said:

You'd have to read up on that, but you'd be allowed to do every single page.

" The copying, whether performed by the library or whether unsupervised by the library patron, cannot be for a commercial advantage. This means that the library (or a copying service hired by the library) cannot profit from the copying. In addition, the copying for the patron must be done for purposes of private study, scholarship, or research."

 

Maybe they can copy a book in it's entirety but they still cannot profit from it.