Copyright-Without it we're nothing!

Everybody has the right not to have their work stolen, be it a Construction worker, an inventor or a journalist the copyright law stays the same.

In a nut-shell, copyright in common law is the act of stealing somebodies intellectual work without their permission. And if caught 'stealing' work you can face being sued by a claimant for loss of earnings or even potential loss of earnings.
'Reproduction of a substantial part of a copyright work may constitute infringment. Whether the part of a copyright work which is copied is a substantial part may depend as much on the quality of what is reproduced as on the quantity (Sweeney vs Macmillan Publishers Ltd [2001] A11 ER (D) 332 (Nov))'.
Copyright Law's enable journalist's to make money, and potentially make a career out of journalism. Therefore it is incredibly important that journalist's make their work safe from copyright infringements.
I remember one of those first things I learnt on this BA Journalism course is that 'Journalism is the practise of turning information into money'. However information alone of course isn't worth an awful lot until its turned into something material, for example the wood that a carpenter uses to make a wardrobe isn't worth as much as it is when it becomes a wardrobe. And in the same way information isn't worth much alone until it is turned into news by journalist's.

Any work that you do is your property until you sell it to someone else. However usually if you are employed by someone else the work you do is their property, and you in return get paid a wage by them. You effectively surrender the rights to your work when you accept any sort of wage for it, but morally you still have rights. For example you have the right for your work not to be tampered and interfered with, and all of your work should be accredited to you.
However for work to be protected by copyright it must have had some sort of hard work or effort put into it. Brief slogans and catchphrases aren't protected. So in relation to some of my own work for Winol; my package on the lecturer strikes would be protected by copyright as I put the effort into getting the interviews and doing the filming myself. However my catch-phrase 'he's hit the Winol woodwork' in my sports feature would not be protected as it is too trivial.

However in Journalism it is sometimes possible to use other peoples work without paying for it or having explicit permission. iThis is called 'fair dealing'. This enables you to use other peoples work for 'review and criticism', private research, and reporting current events and covers you in the case of incidental inclusion. But all of this must be properly accredited to its author.

Qualified Privilege

Qualified Privilege is to a journalist what a scrum hat is to a second rower in Rugby. It gives them the protection they need to peform at the peak of their game. However for players to jutify wearing them, they have to be brave and play well, just as journalist's have to be FAST, ACCURATE and FAIR with immediate publication and with no errors or malice.

In its purest form qualified privelege means exemption from the law, which is something that judges have while they are within a courtroom. The Queen is an example of somebody who constantly posseses qualified privelege-as she is above the law. If the Queen decided to kill someone it wouldn't be classed as murder, but she doesn't scare me much!

If you are to publish something defamatory about someone, you need a defence to avoid legal action against you.
One of the main defences is 'Justification'. This essentially means that if you can prove something is true you can't lose. For example the Newspapapers that posted stories about Ryan Giggs being a love cheat were in the clear, because they could prove it was true, despite Giggs claming privacy.

Another key defense for journalist's is that of 'Comment'. This means that you have the freedom to defame someone if it is written in such a way that it clearly written as opinion and not as fact. For example insulting a television personality in a feature piece in a broadsheet is OK, as it is recognised as comment.

The key thing to remember as a journalist though when reporting on something which may be deemed defamatory is to ensure that what you report on is in the public interest.
Public Interest is argued in a legal case to justify information being published. (McNae, 2009). It is important to understand the difference between the genuine public interest (i.e protecting the safety of the public, exposing crime, and preventing the public from being mislead by an important figure)and news which may be of great interest to the public but is essentially tittle tattle (most obvious within 'kiss and tell stories'.

Journalist's are strongly advised to abide to the 10 point test of media law, so its only right that I put them on my blog!
1) Seriousness of the allegation
2) The nature of information
3) The source of information
4) The steps taken to verify of the matter
5) The status of information
6) The urgency of the matter
7) Whether comment was sought from the claimant
8) Whether the article contained the gist of the claimant's side of the story
9) The tone of the article
10) The circumstances of the publication

When reporting news, you will almost always stay on the safe side as long as you abide to the above 10 points and are fast, accurate and fair in doing so.

Defamation and Libel

Everyone has the right to their reputation. Your reputation is made up facts about you; such as your qualifications, and your bodily statistics. The rest of your reputation is made up of the opinions of people who have met you, such as your lecturers and teachers. If you defame somebody you can face being sued, and there has been a large number of high profile cases over the years, where libel victims have sued newspapers for thousands of pounds.

A statement is defamatory if it does any of the following things;
Lowers the claimant in the estimation of right-thinking people
Causes them to be shunned or avoided
Disparages them in their business, trade or profession
Exposes them to hatred, ridicule or contempt.

However Defamation is only one of the aspects of a Libel case. The defamatory statement also has to be published, (written down, or in video). To officially be defamation it is has to have been communicated to at least one other person, which of course in journalism isn't particularly hard to prove as publication is so widespread. The claimant also has to be identified so far that a reasonable person would recognise that he or she is being referred to.
It is important to recognise that in court the claimant doesn't have to prove that the statement is false, as this is already assumed. Journalists have a defence if the statement is true and they can prove that it’s true.
The 'Reynolds Defence' can protect a publisher in some circumstances, when the untrue statement is in the public interest. The Reynolds defence aka 'The Ten Point Test is as follows;
1) Seriousness of the allegation
2) Nature of Information
3) Source of Information
4) The steps taken to verify the information
5) The status of information
6) The urgency of the matter
7) Whether comment was saught by the claimant
8) Whether the article contained the gist of the claimant's side of the story
9) The tone of the article
10) The circumstances of the publication

If all of these points are met you can use this as a defence.

A Libel case that has been in the news recently is that of Morrissey. He is claming that he was defamed in 2007 by the music magazine NME where they deliberately twisted his words, and made him seem racist. If true this is clearly defamatory because a public figure is being made out to be a racist could lead to him being exposed to hatred, ridicule or contempt and generally lowers him in the eyes of a right-thinking member of society. The defence claim that there is no evidence to show that Morrissey’s reputation was harmed by the publication.
This case highlights how complex Libel Law's are and proves that you should always take measures to ensure you are not defaming somebody in your work as you can be sued for a lot of money and it can be very harmful to your own career.

Law Lecture notes-week 2

How to react to a Crime Story unfolding

When reporting on crime you must always be aware of the risks involved. The main risks are that of Prejudice and Contempt. Prejudice within crime reporting could be judging somebody before a trial, which can contaminate their chances of a fair trial, which can lead to contempt of court.
The time when you are most at risk is when the there has been an arrest made, which is when the case becomes legally active.

During this time you are very limited as to what you can report on. These are as follows:
-Names of defendants, ages, addresses and occupations
-Charges faced or a close summary
-Name of court and magistrates names
-Names of solicitor's or Barrister's present
-Date and place to where case is adjourned
-Any arrangements as to bail
-Whether legal aid was granted.

Cases such as family disputes and motoring offences can be handled in a magistrates court. Magistrates have the power to jail an offender for up to six months, and can hand out fines of up to £5,000. They also have the power to give offenders community orders and ASBO's.

Key stages of a trial
-prosecution opening
-key prosecution witnesses
-defence opening
-key defence witnesses
-Judge's summing up
-Jury sent out, deliberation and verdict
-Sentencing

The main rules of court reporting are that the reports are fair, accurate, contemporaneous and that there is no recording during the trial.