Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

Offenders rarely deceive victims about their sexual interests.

promises of love and romance

99% of victims of Internet-initiated sex crimes in the N-JOV Study were 13 to 17 years old, and none were younger than 12. 48% were 13 or 14 years old. (115)

My (Liz B. Davis ) Summary of Key Points (All are quotes directly from the article): Online "Predators" and Their Victims. Myths, Realities, and Implications for Prevention and Treatment. by: Janis Wolak, David Finkelhor, and Kimberly J. Mitchell - University of New Hampshire and Michele L. Ybarra - Internet Solutions for Kids, Inc.

it was those 15-17 years of age who were most prone to take risks involving privacy and contact with unknown people. (115)

take place in isolation and secrecy, outside of oversight by peers, family  members, and others in the youth's face-to-face social networks (115)

Most of the online child molesters described in the N-JOV Study met their victims in chatrooms. In a 2006 study, about one third of youths who received online sexual solicitation had received them in chatrooms. (116)

Youth internet users with histories of offline sexual or physical abuse appear to be considerably more likely to receive online aggressive sexual solicitations. (117)

..Although Internet safety advocates worry that posting personal information exposes youths to online molesters, we have not found empirical evidence that supports this concern. It is interactive behaviors, such as conversing online with unknown people about sex, that more clearly create risk. (117)

Online molesters do not appear to be stalking unsuspecting victims but rather continuing to seek youths who are susceptible to seduction. (117)

maintaining online blogs or journals, which are similar to social networking sites in that they often include considerable amounts of personal information and pictures, is not related to receiving aggressive sexual solicitation unless youths also interact online with unknown people. (117)

Boys constitute 25% of victims in Internet-initiated sex crimes, and virtually all of their offenders are male. (118

Some gay boys turn to the internet to find answers to questions about sexuality or meet potential romantic partners, and there they may encounter adults who exploit them. (118)

..child molesters are, in reality, a diverse group that cannot be accurately characterized with one-dimensional labels. (118)

Online child molesters are generally not pedophiles. (118)Online child molesters are rarely violent. (119)

Child pornography production is also an aspect of Internet-initiated sex crimes. One in five online child molesters in the N-JOV Study took sexually suggestive or explicit photographs of victims or convinced victims to take such photographs of themselves or friends. (120)

Youths may be more willing to talk extensively and about more intimate matters with adults online than in face-to-face environments. (121

it may not be clear to many adolescents and adults that relationships between adults and underage adolescents are criminal. (122)

Simply urging parents and guardians to control, watch, or educate their children may not be effective in many situations. The adolescents who tend to be the victims of Internet-initiated sex crimes many not themselves be very receptive to the advice and supervision of parents. (122)

We recommend educating youths frankly about the dynamics of Internet-initiated and other nonforcible sex crimes. Youths need candid, direct discussions about seduction and how some adults deliberately evoke and then exploit the compelling feelings that sexual arousal can induce. (122)

Youths need candid, direct discussions about seduction

Permission is not necessary to satisfy fair use.

Fair use is a doctrine within copyright law that allows use of copyrighted material for educational purposes without permission from the the owners or creators. It is designed to balance rights of users with the rights of owners by encouraging widespread and flexible use of cultural products for the purposes of education and the advancement of knowledge.

My new understanding: I learned on Friday night that the critical test for fairness in terms of educational use of media is transformative use. When a user of copyrighted materials adds value to, or repurposes materials for a use different from that for which it was originally intended, it will likely be considered transformative use; it will also likely be considered fair use. Fair use embraces the modifying of existing media content, placing it in new context.  Examples of transformativeness might include: using campaign video in a lesson exploring media strategies or rhetoric, using music videos to explore such themes as urban violence, using commercial advertisements to explore messages relating to body image or the various different ways beer makers sell beer, remixing a popular song to create a new artistic expression.

Long ago, I learned that educational use of media had to pass four tests to be appropriate and fair according to U.S. Code Title 17 107: the purpose and character of the use, including whether the use is commercial or nonprofit the nature of the use the amount of the use the effect of the use on the potential market for the copyrighted work.

--A Conversation about Media Literacy, Copyright and Fair Use--stirred up more cognitive disonance than I've experienced in years

the discussion was one of several to be held around the country designed to clear up widespread confusion and to: develop a shared understanding of how copyright and fair use applies to the creative media work that our students create and our own use of copyrighted materials as educators, practitioners, advocates and curriculum developers.

national code of practice

Jaszi points to Bill Graham Archives vs.Dorling Kindersley (2006) as a clear example of how courts liberally interpret fair use even with a commercial publisher.

The publisher added value in its use of the posters. And such use was transformative.

Here's what I think I learned on Friday about fair use: The Multimedia Fair Use Guidelines describe minimum rules for fair use, but were never intended as specific rules or designed to exhaust the universe of educational practice.  They were meant as a dynamic, rather than static doctrine, supposed to expand with time, technology, changes in practice.  Arbitrary rules regarding proportion or time periods of use (for instance, 30-second or 45-day rules) have no legal status.  The fact that permission has been sought but not granted is irrelevant.  Permission is not necessary to satisfy fair use. Fair use is fair use without regard to program or platform. What is fair, because it is transformative, is fair regardless of place of use. If a student has repurposed and added value to copyrighted material, she should be able to use it beyond the classroom (on YouTube, for instance) as well as within it.  Not every student use of media is fair, but many uses are. One use not likely to be fair, is the use of a music soundtrack merely as an aesthetic addition to a student video project. Students need to somehow recreate to add value.  Is the music used simply a nice aesthetic addition or does the new use give the piece different meaning? Are students adding value, engaging the music, reflecting, somehow commenting on.the music? Not everything that is rationalized as educationally beneficial is necessarily fair use.  For instance, photocopying a text book because it is not affordable is still not fair use.

Copyright law is friendlier to good teaching than many teachers now realize. Fair use is like a muscle that needs to be exercised.  People can't exercise it in a climate of fear and uncertainty