Based on this week, I think I will discuss the legalities and what is considered doing the “right” thing.
Even though this is ‘our’ own sites and domains, it does not mean we could do anything we wanted. At least, within reason and avoiding problems, as some peers have met in the past according to our professor Suzanne.
In academia, we source our information that we research in our relevant papers. The action remains the same while form is different. Often articles/peer’s websites and posts like my own, link their sources like this example that goes to the weather channel. Of course, if we want to be more technical and it is relevant, we could be formal with page numbers and so forth, but it all depends on the tone as well.
With last week’s topic about misinformation and disinformation, thus my thought on this week is how to be the person to do our best to prevent ourselves from doing the same. Through due diligence, source checking and onwards, it can lead to building the important notions of credibility and authenticity. Caufield in this 2016’s text discusses digital literacy items like RADCAB and CRAAP. Both of which ultimately to point the essence of being accurate and genuine with our facts as often we can.
In conjunction with my own posts and site topic, the content often remains ‘truthful’ as it is my own story. My last 2 peer reviews had their own topics that were true to their own story. Kobe will talk about his business thoughts, while Lily will discuss her knitting journey. With this objective truth, there isn’t a real reason to deny their post or what they say for the most part. Lily knitted the sweater; it is either factual or it’s a fabricated well-knitted lie 😂 ha-ha.
Images, Photos, Copyright
Essentially, I have been super mindful and cognizant from the get-go when we started this course in Publishing 101. I knew the safest way to navigate the copyrighted images is to use my own. Whether it is from my own creation or my photos that I took. It fit the type of content I was creating, so there wasn’t a need to force it either.
The only times that copyrighted content appears is through embeds, linking or already-manipulated texts. As this is for educational purposes, there is no problems here for using typically copyrighted items. However, in order to track my own content, it is best that I do minimal to none: unless is royalty-free, copyright-free, Creative Commons, public property or otherwise.
Site, Design, Arrangements
Although site designs are templates and they were provided presumably for others to use, I have tweaked my site as my own as well. Therefore, I have modified and changed to a degree where it is my unique site. I am not sure if this could be a copyright item, but it is probably safe to assume design could be copyrighted.
After all, in Peter Henein’s text about a recipe Canadian copyright court case, “the Court noted that while facts cannot be copyrighted, compilations of facts generally can be.” In continuation, “it does not protect the underlying unoriginal elements.” The legalities and technicalities become very interesting to weave through. However, it is interesting to think about these topics. For example, pieces of code can be trademarked or patented as well. While I can copyright my images or content, the codes that support the infrastructures of my site are not my own (which makes sense).
Even my poor penguin logo, I haven’t found the time to create a better one, but as you can tell the MS paint quality logo in order to avoid using an arguably better-looking penguin from the internet. Maybe I should look into creative commons or public domain images… no, I will not. It must be a logo I created as it represents myself.
Facts and Sources
The final third component to analyze and discuss about my site in more detail is sources and facts. While it is important to always check, I would be inclined to believe that the academic references I make have been vetted from the academia team as valid sources and their information is the best available. With that in mind, checking author, date, relevancy, content, critically reflecting on the information if it makes sense in the first place, and if additional checks are needed are steps to a filtering a good source.
That being said, I think I want to refer to Thompson’s reading about internet slang words where words are sometimes used without deeper context. Some could be harmful, while others are not. It is like a youngling who has not learned what words mean yet in the greater context, they say the word innocently.
An example that brings a smile to my face is Tony Stark and his daughter: Quote “Nope, we don’t say that, only mommy says that” as Stark tries to recover his mistake after his surprise in time-travel calculations.
The moral of the story behind this is that we can often reiterate or deliver information that we hear, but we do not know what it means exactly. Just like slang words on the internet, (thankfully we have Urban Dictionary or other sites to explain) certain origins of words or memes, but it isn’t easy to identify this step as important. Furthermore, the step of finding urban dictionary and origins is simpler with words. With facts, concepts, and content to check, that is where it becomes trickier and effort.
After all, it is quite redundant to spend our whole lives just checking everything. That is living in skepticism which is not a positive mindset.
Returning back to the beginning of this post. As we create our digital gardens and personal cyber infrastructures, while in theory, we have unlimited reign, we’re still constrained to rules and conventions. Whether it is the languages we speak, the supported formats our design/websites have, the limits of storage space and access limitations like exposure, popularity and audiences that can understand your content.
Likewise with copyright, rules etc. if we want to avoid legal questions, it is best to follow what is ‘right’. If we want advertising, then it is in our interests to follow those guidelines as well. What is truly freedom? That is a question to think about.
Nonetheless, making sure credit is given where credit is due is something any good author, owner and creator out there should do!
- Caulfield, Mike. December 19, 2016. Yes, Digital Literacy. But which one?
- Henein, Peter. 2015. “You Say ‘Tomaydo’”, I say no copyright infringement: Recipe book not an original compilation” www.casselsbrock.com
- Thompson, Dillon. 2022. “Is the Internet Changing How We Talk About Slang Words?“