text:
- Fair use
Fair use is a doctrine in
United States copyright lawthat allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as use for scholarship or review. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test. The term "fair use" originated in the United States, but has been added to Israeli and the UKlaw as well; a similar principle, fair dealing, exists in some other common lawjurisdictions. Civil law jurisdictions have other limitations and exceptions to copyright.
Fair use under United States law
The legal concept of "Test copyright" was first ratified by the Kingdom of Great Britain's
Statute of Anneof 1709. As room was not made for the authorized reproduction of copyrighted content within this newly formulated statutory right, the courts gradually created a doctrine of "fair abridgment," which later became "fair use," that recognized the utility of such actions. The doctrine only existed in the U.S. as common lawuntil it was incorporated into the Copyright Act of 1976, UnitedStatesCode|17|107, reprinted here:
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections UnitedStatesCode|17|106 and UnitedStatesCode|17|106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:
:# the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;:# the nature of the copyrighted work;:# the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and:# the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors. [ [http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html US CODE: Title 17,107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use ] ]
The four factors of analysis for fair use set forth above derive from the classic opinion of
Joseph Storyin "Folsom v. Marsh", 9 F.Cas. 342 (1841), in which the defendant had copied 353 pages from the plaintiff's 12-volume biography of George Washingtonin order to produce a separate two-volume work of his own. The court rejected the defendant's fair use defense with the following explanation:
[A] reviewer may fairly cite largely from the original work, if his design be really and truly to use the passages for the purposes of fair and reasonable criticism. On the other hand, it is as clear, that if he thus cites the most important parts of the work, with a view, not to criticize, but to supersede the use of the original work, and substitute the review for it, such a use will be deemed in law a piracy…
In short, we must often… look to the nature and objects of the selections made, the quantity and value of the materials used, and the degree in which the use may prejudice the sale, or diminish the profits, or supersede the objects, of the original work.
Once these factors were codified as guidelines in USC|17|107, they were not rendered exclusive. The section was intended by Congress to restate, but not replace, the prior judge-made law. Courts are still entitled to consider other factors as well.
Fair use tempers copyright's exclusive rights to serve the purpose of copyright law, which the U.S. Constitution defines as the promotion of "the Progress of Science and useful Arts" (Art. I, § 8, cl. 8). This principle applies particularly well to the case of criticism and also sheds light on various other limitations on copyright's exclusive rights, particularly the "scenes à faire" doctrine.
Purpose and character
You can use music and video for anyway you see fit. From music videos to features films. If you pay for the music you can use it. This is the first thing about Fair Use.The first factor is about whether the use in question helps fulfill the intention of copyright law to stimulate creativity for the enrichment of the general public, or whether it aims to only "supersede the objects" of the original for reasons of personal profit. To justify the use as fair, one must demonstrate how it either advances knowledge or the progress of the arts through the addition of something new. A key consideration is the extent to which the use is interpreted as "transformative", as opposed to merely "derivative".
Tom Forsytheappropriated Barbiedolls for his photography project "Food Chain Barbie," Mattellost its claims of copyright and trademark infringement against him because his work effectively parodies Barbie and the values she represents. [" Mattel, Inc. v. Walking Mountain Productions, No. 01-56695, 9th Circuit, December 29, 2003": http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/coa/newopinions.nsf/6205C146C29519CC88256E0B005D8100/$file/0156695.pdf ] But when Jeff Koonstried to justify his appropriation of Art Rogers' photograph "Puppies" in his sculpture "String of Puppies" with the same parody defense, he lost because his work was not presented as a parody of Rogers' photograph in particular, but of society at large, which was deemed insufficiently justificatory. ["Art Rogers v. Jeff Koons", 960 F.2d 301]
However, since this case, courts have begun to emphasize the first fair use factor—assessing whether the alleged infringement has "transformative" use as described by the Hon. Judge
Pierre N. Leval. [cite journal |last=Leval |first=Pierre N. |authorlink= |coauthors= |year=1990 |month= |title=Toward a Fair Use Standard |journal= Harvard Law Review|volume=103 |issue=5 |pages=1105–1136 |doi=10.2307/1341457 |url= |accessdate= |quote= ] More recently, Koons was involved in a similar case with commercial photographer Andrea Blanch, [" Blanch v. Koons, No. 05-6433, 2nd Circuit, October 26, 2006": http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/2nd/056433p.pdf ] regarding his use of her photograph for a painting, whereby he appropriated a central portion of an advertisement she had been commissioned to shoot for a magazine. In this case, Koons won; the case sets a favorable precedent for appropriation art where the use is deemed transformative.
The subfactor mentioned in the legislation above, "whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes," has recently been deemphasized in some Circuits "since many, if not most, secondary uses seek at least some measure of commercial gain from their use." ["American Geophysical Union", 60 F.3d at 921] More important is whether the use fulfills any of the "preamble purposes" also mentioned in the legislation above, as these have been interpreted as paradigmatically "transformative." Although Judge Pierre Leval has distinguished the first factor as "the soul of fair use," it alone is not determinative. For example, not every educational usage is fair. [see the 1914 case, "
Macmillan Co. v. King", although this case has only limited application since it was decided many years before the modern fair use provision became a part of the legislation]
Nature of the copied work
Although the
Supreme Court of the United Stateshas ruled that the availability of copyright protection should not depend on the artistic quality or merit of a work, fair use analyses consider certain aspects of the work to be relevant, such as whether it is fictional or non-fictional.
To prevent the private ownership of work that rightfully belongs in the public domain, facts and ideas are separate from copyright—only their particular expression or fixation merits such protection. On the other hand, the social usefulness of freely available information can weigh against the appropriateness of copyright for certain fixations. The
Zapruder filmof the assassination of President Kennedy, for example, was purchased and copyrighted by "Time" magazine. Yet their copyright was not upheld, in the name of the public interest, when they tried to enjoin the reproduction of stills from the film in a history book on the subject in " Time Inc. v. Bernard Geis Associates". [" Time Inc. v. Bernard Geis Associates", 293 F. Supp. 130]
Following the decisions of the Second Circuit in "Salinger v. Random House, Inc." ["Salinger v. Random House, Inc.", 650 F. Supp. 413 (
S.D.N.Y.1986)] and in "New Era Publications Int'l v. Henry Holt & Co.", ["New Era Publications Int'l v. Henry Holt & Co.", 695 F. Supp. 1493 ( S.D.N.Y.1988)] whether the copied work has been previously published suddenly trumped all other considerations because of, in the words of one commentator, "the original author's interest in controlling the circumstances of the first public revelation of his work, and his right, if he so chooses, not to publish at all." Yet some view this importation of certain aspects of France's " [http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droit_moral droit moral] d'artiste" (moral rights of the artist) into American copyright law as "bizarre and contradictory" because it sometimes grants greater protection to works that were created for private purposes that have little to do with the public goals of copyright law, than to those works that copyright was initially conceived to protect. This is not to claim that unpublished works, or, more specifically, works not intended for publication, do not deserve legal protection, but that any such protection should come from laws about privacy, rather than laws about copyright. The statutory fair use provision was amended in response to these concerns by adding a final sentence: "The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors."
Amount and substantiality
The third factor assesses the quantity or percentage of the original copyrighted work that has been imported into the new work. In general, the less that is used in relation to the whole, e.g., a few sentences of a text for a book review, the more likely that the sample will be considered fair use. Yet see "Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios" for a case in which substantial copying—entire programs for private viewing—was upheld as fair use. Likewise, see "
Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation," where the Ninth Circuitheld that copying an entire photo to use as a thumbnail in online search results did not weigh against fair use, "if the secondary user only copies as much as is necessary for his or her intended use." Conversely, in "Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enters," [" Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enters.", Findlaw us|471|539 (1985)] the use of less than 400 words from President Ford's memoir by a political opinion magazine was interpreted as infringement because those few words represented "the heart of the book" and were, as such, substantial.
Before 1991, sampling in certain genres of music was accepted practice and such copyright considerations as these were viewed as largely irrelevant. The strict decision against rapper
Biz Markie's appropriation of a Gilbert O'Sullivansong in the case " Grand Upright Music, Ltd. v. Warner Bros. Records, Inc." [" Grand Upright Music, Ltd. v. Warner Bros. Records, Inc.", 780 F. Supp. 182 ( S.D.N.Y.1991)] changed practices and opinions overnight. Samples now had to be licensed, as long as they rose "to a level of legally cognizable appropriation." [" Bridgeport Music Inc. v. Dimension Films", 230 F. Supp.2d at 841 [http://fsnews.findlaw.com/cases/6th/04a0297p.html] ] In other words, " de minimis" sampling was still considered fair and free because, traditionally, "the law does not care about trifles." The recent Sixth Circuit Court decision in the appeal to "Bridgeport Music" has reversed this standing, eliminating the "de minimis" defense for samples of recorded music, but stating that the decision did not apply to fair use.
Effect upon work's value
The fourth factor measures the effect that the allegedly infringing use has had on the copyright owner's ability to exploit his original work. The court not only investigates whether the defendant's specific use of the work has significantly harmed the copyright owner's market, but also whether such uses in general, if widespread, would harm the potential market of the original. The burden of proof here rests on the defendant for commercial uses, but on the copyright owner for noncommercial uses. See "
Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios", [" Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios", 464 U.S. 417, 451 (1984)] where the copyright owner, Universal, failed to provide any empirical evidence that the use of Betamaxhad either reduced their viewership or negatively impacted their business. In the aforementioned "Nation" case regarding President Ford's memoirs, the Supreme Court labeled this factor "the single most important element of fair use" and it has indeed enjoyed some level of primacy in fair use analyses ever since. Yet the Supreme Court's more recent announcement in " Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc."" Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.", Findlaw us|510|578 (1994)] that "all [four factors] are to be explored, and the results weighed together, in light of the purposes of copyright" has helped modulate this emphasis in interpretation.
In evaluating the fourth factor, courts often consider two kinds of harm to the potential market of the original work: First, courts consider whether the use in question acts as a
direct marketsubstitute for the original work. In the judgement of the Supreme Court in "Acuff-Rose Music" they decisively stated that, "when a commercial use amounts to mere duplication of the entirety of the original, it clearly supersedes the object of the original and serves as a market replacement for it, making it likely that cognizable market harm to the original will occur." In one instance, a court ruled that this factor weighed against a defendant who had made unauthorized movie trailers for video retailers, since his trailers acted as direct substitutes for the copyright owner's official trailers. [" Video Pipeline v. Buena Vista", 342 F.3d 191 ( 3d Cir.2003)] Second, courts also consider whether potential market harm might exist beyond that of direct substitution, such as in the potential existence of a licensing market. This consideration has weighed against commercial copy shops that make copies of articles in course-pack for college students, when a market already existed for the licensingof course-pack copies. [" Princeton Univ. Press v. Michigan Document Services", 99 F.3d 1381 ( 6th Cir.1999)]
Courts recognize that certain kinds of market harm do not oppose fair use, such as when a parody or negative review impairs the market of the original work. Copyright considerations may not shield a work against adverse criticism.
Fair use and professional communities
Courts when deciding fair use cases, in addition to looking at context, amount and value of the use, also look to the standards and practices of the professional communities where the case comes from.
Documentary filmmakers organized and created the Documentary Filmmakers' [http://www.centerforsocialmedia.org/resources/publications/statement_of_best_practices_in_fair_use/ Statement of Best Practices in Fair Use] , which has had a dramatic effect on fair use practice in documentary film. Since the release of the Statement in 2005, PBS, ITVS and IFC use it. Furthermore, four out of seven of the national errors and omissions insurers now issue fair use coverage routinely. Several documentary films have also used it, allowing both theatrical and television releases. Other professional communities are beginning to plan their own best practices standards in fair use as well.
Practical effect of fair use defense
The practical effect of this law and the court decisions following it is that it is usually possible to quote from a copyrighted work in order to criticize or comment upon it, teach students about it, and possibly for other uses. Certain well-established uses cause few problems. A teacher who prints a few copies of a poem to illustrate a technique will have no problem on all four of the above factors (except possibly on amount and substantiality), but some cases are not so clear. All the factors are considered and balanced in each case: a book reviewer who quotes a paragraph as an example of the author's style will probably fall under fair use even though he may sell his review commercially. But a non-profit educational website that reproduces whole articles from technical magazines will probably be found to infringe if the publisher can demonstrate that the website affects the market for the magazine, even though the website itself is non-commercial.
Free Republic, LLC, owner of the political website freerepublic.com, was found liable for copyright infringement in L.A. Times v. Free Republicfor reproducing and archiving full-text versions of plaintiffs' news articles even though the judge found the website minimally commercial. She held that "while defendants' do not necessarily 'exploit' the articles for commercial gain, their posting to the Free Republic site allows defendants and other visitors to avoid paying the 'customary price' charged for the works."
The April 2000 opinion ruled concerning the four factors of fair use that 1) "defendants' use of plaintiffs' articles is minimally, if at all, transformative," 2) the factual content of the articles copied "weighs in favor of finding of fair use of the news articles by defendants in this case," though it didn't "provide strong support" 3) concerning the amount and substantiality prong, "the wholesale copying of plaintiffs' articles weighs against the finding of fair use," and 4) the plaintiffs showed that they were trying to exploit the market for viewing their articles online and defendants didn't rebut their showing by proving an absence of usurpation harm to plaintiffs. Ultimately the court found "that the defendants may not assert a fair use defense to plaintiffs' copyright infringement claim."
Fair use as a defense
Supreme Court of the United Statesdescribed fair use as an affirmative defensein " Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.". This means that, in litigationon copyright infringement, the defendant bears the burden of raising and proving that his use was "fair" and not an infringement. Thus, fair use need not even be raised as a defense unless the plaintiff first shows (or the defendant concedes) a " prima facie" case of copyright infringement. If the work was not copyrightable, the term had expired, or the defendant's work borrowed only a small amount, for instance, then the plaintiff cannot make out a "prima facie" case of infringement, and the defendant need not even raise the fair use defense.
Because of the defendant's burden of proof, some copyright owners frequently make claims of infringement even in circumstances where the fair use defense would likely succeed in hopes that the user will refrain from the use rather than spending resources in his defense. This type of frivolous lawsuit is part of a much larger problem in First Amendment law; see "
Strategic lawsuit against public participation".
Because paying a royalty fee may be much less expensive than having a potential copyright suit threaten the publication of a completed work in which a publisher has invested significant resources, many authors may seek a license even for uses that copyright law ostensibly permits without liability.
The frequent argument over whether fair use is a "right" or a "defense" [ [http://www.eff.org/IP/eff_fair_use_faq.php http://www.eff.org/IP/eff_fair_use_faq.php] "Eff.org" Retrieved on 05-21-07 ] is generated by confusion over the use of the term "affirmative defense." An affirmative defense is simply a
term of artfrom litigation reflecting the timing in which the defense is raised. It does not distinguish between "rights" and "defenses," and so it does not characterize the substance of the defendant's actions as "not a right but a defense." The First Amendment, for instance, is generally raised as an affirmative defense in litigation, but is clearly a "right." Similarly, while fair use is characterized as a defense in terms of the litigation posture, Section 107 defines fair use as a "limitation" on copyright law and states clearly that "the fair use of a copyrighted work … is not an infringement of copyright." [17 U.S.C. 107.]
In response to perceived over-expansion of copyrights, several electronic civil liberties and free expression organizations began in the 1990s to add fair use cases to their dockets and concerns. These include the
Electronic Frontier Foundation("EFF"), the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Coalition Against Censorship, the American Library Association, numerous clinical programs at law schools, and others. The "Chilling Effects" archive was established in 2002 as a coalition of several law school clinics and the EFF to document the use of cease and desistletters. Most recently, in 2006, Stanford Universitybegan an initiative called "The Fair Use Project" (FUP) to help artists, particularly filmmakers, fight lawsuits brought against them by large corporations.
The economic benefit of fair use
A balanced copyright law provides an economic benefit to many high tech businesses such as search engines and software developers and Fair Use is also crucial to non-technology industries such as insurance, legal services, and newspaper publishers. On September 12, 2007, the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA), a group representing companies including
MicrosoftInc., [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118593806790484425.html Wall Street Journal. "Google, Others Contest Copyright Warnings" by Sarah McBride and Adam Thompson. August 1, 2007.] ] Oracle Corporation, Sun Microsystems, Yahoo[ [http://www.ccianet.org/members.html Computer and Communications Industry Association. "CCIA Members."] ] and other high tech companies, released a study that found that Fair Use exceptions to US copyright laws were responsible for more than $4,500 Billion dollars in annual revenue for the United States economy representing one-sixth of the total U.S. GDP. [http://www.ccianet.org/artmanager/publish/news/First-Ever_Economic_Study_Calculates_Dollar_Value_of.shtml Computer and Communications Industry Association. "Fair Use Economy Represents One-Sixth of U.S. GDP." September 12, 2007.] ] The study was conducted using a methodology developed by the World Intellectual Property Organization. The study found that fair use dependent industries are directly responsible for more than 18% of U.S. economic growth and nearly 11 million American jobs. "As the United States economy becomes increasingly knowledge-based, the concept of fair use can no longer be discussed and legislated in the abstract. It is the very foundation of the digital age and a cornerstone of our economy," said Ed Black, President and CEO of CCIA. "Much of the unprecedented economic growth of the past ten years can actually be credited to the doctrine of fair use, as the Internet itself depends on the ability to use content in a limited and nonlicensed manner."
Fair use and parody
Producers or creators of parodies of a copyrighted work have been sued for infringement by the targets of their ridicule, even though such use may be protected as fair use. The fair use cases addressing parodies distinguish between parodies—using a work in order to poke fun at or comment on the work itself—and satires—using a work to poke fun at or comment on something else. Courts have been more willing to grant fair use protections to parodies than to satires, but the ultimate outcome in either circumstance will turn on the application of the four fair use factors.
In "
Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc." Supreme Court recognized parody as a fair use, even when done for profit. Roy Orbison's publisher, Acuff-Rose Music Inc., had sued 2 Live Crewin 1989 for their use of Orbison's " Oh, Pretty Woman" in a mocking rap version with altered lyrics. The Supreme Court viewed 2 Live Crew's version as a ridiculing commentary on the earlier work, and ruled that when the parody was itself the product rather than used for mere advertising, commercial sale did not bar the defense. The "Campbell" court also distinguished parodies from satire, which they described as a broader social critique not intrinsically tied to ridicule of a specific work, and so not deserving of the same use exceptions as parody because the satirist's ideas are capable of expression without the use of the other particular work.
A number of appellate decisions have recognized parody as a protected fair use, including both the Second ("
Leibovitz v. Paramount Pictures Corp.") and Ninth Circuits ("Mattel v. Walking Mountain Productions"). Most recently, " Suntrust v. Houghton Mifflin", a suit was brought unsuccessfully against the publication of " The Wind Done Gone", which reused many of the characters and situations from " Gone with the Wind", but told the events from the point of view of the slaves rather than the slaveholders. The Eleventh Circuit, applying "Campbell", recognized that "The Wind Done Gone" was a protected parody, and vacated the district court's injunction against its publication.
Fair use on the Internet
A US court case in 2003, "
Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation," provides and develops the relationship between thumbnails, inline linkingand fair use. In the lower District Court case on a motion for summary judgment, Arriba Soft was found to have violated copyright without a fair use defense in the use of thumbnail pictures and inline linking from Kelly's website in Arriba's image search engine. That decision was appealed and contested by Internet rights activists such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who argued that it is clearly covered under fair use.
On appeal, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found in favor of the defendant. In reaching its decision, the court utilized the above-mentioned four-factor analysis. First, it found the purpose of creating the thumbnail images as previews to be sufficiently transformative, noting that they were not meant to be viewed at high resolution like the original artwork was. Second, the fact that the photographs had already been published diminished the significance of their nature as creative works. Third, although normally making a "full" replication of a copyrighted work may appear to violate copyright, here it was found to be reasonable and necessary in light of the intended use. Lastly, the court found that the market for the original photographs would not be substantially diminished by the creation of the thumbnails. To the contrary, the thumbnail searches could increase exposure of the originals. In looking at all these factors as a whole, the court found that the thumbnails were fair use and remanded the case to the lower court for trial after issuing a revised opinion on
July 7, 2003. The remaining issues were resolved with a default judgmentafter Arriba Soft had experienced significant financial problems and failed to reach a negotiated settlement.
In August of 2008 U.S. District Judge
Jeremy Fogelof San Jose, Californiaruled that copyright holders cannot order a deletion of an online file without determining whether that posting reflected "fair use" of the copyrighted material. The case involved Stephanie Lenz, a writer and editor from Gallitzin, Pennsylvania, who made a home video of her 13-month-old son dancing to Prince's song Let's Go Crazyand posted the 29-second video on YouTube. Four months later, Universal Music, the owner of the copyright to the song, ordered YouTube to remove the video enforcing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Lenz notified YouTube several weeks later that her video was within the scope of fair use, and demanded that it be restored. YouTube complied after two weeks, as required by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, to see whether Universal planned to sue Lenz for infringement. Lenz then sued Universal Musicin California for her legal costs, claiming the music company had acted in bad faith by ordering removal of a video that represented fair-use of the song. [cite news |first= |last= |authorlink= |coauthors= |title=Woman can sue over YouTube clip de-posting |url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/20/MNU412FKRL.DTL |quote= |work= San Francisco Chronicle|date= |accessdate=2008-08-25 ]
Common misunderstandings
Fair use is commonly misunderstood because of its deliberate ambiguity. Here are some of the more common misunderstandings with explanations of why they are wrong:
*"Any use that seems fair is fair use". In the law, the term "fair use" has a specific meaning that only partly overlaps the plain-English meaning of the words. While judges have much leeway in deciding how to apply fair use guidelines, not every use that is commonly considered "fair" counts as fair use under the law.
*"Fair use interpretations, once made, are static forever." Fair use is decided on a case by case basis, on the entirety of circumstances. The same act done by different means or for a different purpose can gain or lose fair use status. Even repeating an identical act at a different point in time can make a difference due to changing social, technological, or other surrounding circumstances.
*"If it's not fair use, it's copyright infringement." Fair use is only one of many limitations, exceptions, and defenses to copyright infringement. For instance, the
Audio Home Recording Actestablishes that it is legal in some circumstances to make copies of audio recordings for non-commercial personal use.
*"It's copyrighted, so it can't be fair use". On the contrary, fair use applies "only" to copyrighted works, describing conditions under which copyrighted material may be used without permission. If a work is not copyrighted, fair use does not come into play, since public-domain works can legally be used for any purpose.
** Note: In some countries (including the United States of America), the mere creation of a work establishes copyright over it, and there is no legal requirement to register or declare copyright ownership.
*"Acknowledgment of the source makes a use fair". Giving the name of the photographer or author may help, but it is not sufficient on its own. While
plagiarismand copyright violation are related matters—-both can, at times, involve failure to properly credit sources—-they are not identical. Copyright law protects exact expression, "not" ideas: for example, a distant paraphrase that lays out the same argument as a copyrighted essay is in little danger of being deemed a copyright violation, but it could still be plagiarism. On the other hand, one can plagiarize even a work that is not protected by copyright, such as trying to pass off a line from Shakespeare as one's own. "Plagiarism"—using someone's words, ideas, images, etc. without acknowledgment—is a matter of professional ethics. Copyright is a matter of law. Citing sources generally prevents accusations of plagiarism, but is not a sufficient defense against copyright violations (otherwise, anyone could legally reprint an entire copyrighted book just by citing who wrote it).
*"Noncommercial use is invariably fair". Not true, though a judge may take the profit motive or lack thereof into account. In "
L.A. Times v. Free Republic", the court found that the noncommercial use of L.A. Times content by the Free Republic Web site was in fact "not" fair use, since it allowed the public to obtain material at no cost that they would otherwise pay for.
*"Strict adherence to fair use protects you from being sued." Fair use is a "defense" against an infringement suit; it does not restrain anyone from suing. The copyright holder may legitimately disagree that a given use is fair, and they have the right to have the matter decided by a court. Thus, fair use is not a deterrent to
*"The lack of a copyright notice means the work is public domain". Not "usually" true. United States law in effect since
March 1, 1989has made copyright the default for newly created works. For a recent work to be in the public domain the author must specifically opt-out of copyright. For works produced between January 1, 1923and March 1, 1989, copyright notice is required; however, registration was not required [ [http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#pub Copyright Office Basics ] ] and between January 1, 1978and March 1, 1989lack of notice is not necessarily determinative, if attempts were made immediately to correct the lack of notice. Any American works that did not have formal registration or notice fell into the Public Domain if registration was not made in a timely fashion. For international works, the situation is even more complex. International authors who failed to provide copyright notice or register with the U.S. copyright office are given additional contemporary remedies that may restore American copyright protection given certain conditions. International authors/corporations who fail to meet these remedies forfeit their copyright. An example of a company who failed to prove copyright was Roland Corporationand their claimed copyright on the sounds contained in their MT-32synthesizer.
*"It's okay to quote up to 300 words". The 300-word limit is reported to be an unofficial agreement, now long obsolete, among permissions editors in the New York publishing houses: 'I'll let you copy 300 words from our books if you let us copy 300 words from yours.' It runs counter to the substantiality standard. As explained above, the substantiality of the copying is more important than the actual amount. For instance, copying a complete short poem is more substantial than copying a random paragraph of a novel; copying an 8.5×11-inch photo is more substantial than copying a square foot of an 8×10-foot painting. In 1985, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a news article's quotation of approximately 300 words from former President Gerald Ford's 200,000 word memoir was sufficient to constitute an infringement of the exclusive publication right in the work. [Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises, 105 S.Ct. 2218 (1985)]
*"You can deny fair use by including a disclaimer". Fair use is a right granted to the public on all copyrighted work. Fair use rights take precedence over the author's interest. Thus the copyright holder cannot use a non-binding disclaimer, or notification, to revoke the right of fair use on works. However, binding agreements such as contracts or license agreements may take precedence over fair use rights. ["Wall Data v. Los Angeles County Sheriff's Dept." (9th Cir. May 17, 2006) ( [http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B4EF4058496AF3AB88257170007CD791/$file/0356559.pdf PDF] at Ninth Circuit).]
*"If you're copying an entire work, it's not fair use". While copying an entire work may make it harder to justify the amount and substantiality test, it does not make it impossible that a use is fair use. For instance, in the Betamax case, it was ruled that copying a complete television show for time-shifting purposes is fair use.
*"If you're selling for profit, it's not fair use". While commercial copying for profit work may make it harder to qualify as fair use, it does not make it impossible. For instance, in the 2 Live Crew—"Oh, Pretty Woman" case, it was ruled that commercial parody can be fair use.
The doctrine of fair use is no longer exclusive to the United States, with other jurisdictions having either implemented such a doctrine or considering its introduction.
Fair use in Canada
CCH Canadian Ltd. v. Law Society of Upper Canada[2004] 1 S.C.R. 339, canlii-scc|2004|13 is the landmark Supreme Court of Canadacase that establishes the bounds of fair dealingin Canadian copyright law. The Law Society of Upper Canadawas sued for copyright infringementfor providing photocopy services to researchers. The Court unanimously held that the Law Society's practice fell within the bounds of fair dealing.
Fair use in Israel
In November 2007, Israel passed a new Copyright Law that included a US style fair use exception. The law, which took effect in May 2008, permits the fair use of copyrighted works for purposes such as private study, research, criticism, review, news reporting, quotation, or instruction or testing by an educational institution. [ [http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1206446110027] "The Jerusalem Post" Retrieved on 05-5-08 ] The law sets up four factors, similar to those of section 107 under American law, to determine whether a use is fair use.
Fair use in South Korea
article 1 rules that this law's two purpose:
*To protect copyright.
*To promote fair use.
International situation
While influential in some quarters, other countries often have drastically different fair use criteria to the US, and in some countries there is little or no fair use defense available. Even within Europe, rules vary greatly between countries. Some countries have the concept of
fair dealinginstead of fair use. However many countries have some reference to an exemption for educational use, although the extent of this exemption may vary wildly. [ [http://teflpedia.com/index.php?title=Copyright_in_English_language_teaching International exemptions for education with links to relevant laws] ]
ee also
Berne three-step test
* Defenses and Exceptions section of
United States copyright law
Fair dealing
Fair use (US trademark law)
Limitations and exceptions to copyright
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Further reading
*cite journal |last=Depoorter |first=Ben |authorlink= |coauthors=Parisi, Francesco |year=2002 |month= |title=Fair Use and Copyright Protection: A Price Theory Explanation |journal=International Review of Law and Economics |volume=21 |issue=4 |pages=453–473 |doi=10.1016/S0144-8188(01)00071-0 |url= |accessdate= |quote=
*cite journal |last=Gordon |first=Wendy J. |authorlink= |coauthors= |year=1982 |month= |title=Fair Use as Market Failure: A Structural and Economic Analysis of the 'Betamax' Case and Its Predecessors |journal=Columbia Law Review |volume=82 |issue=8 |pages=1600–1657 |doi=10.2307/1122296 |url= |accessdate= |quote=
*cite journal |last=Samuelson |first=Pamela |authorlink= |coauthors= |year=1995 |month= |title=Copyright's fair use doctrine and digital data |journal=Publishing Research Quarterly |volume=11 |issue=1 |pages=27–39 |doi=10.1007/BF02680415 |url= |accessdate= |quote=
External links and sources
tatute & case law resources
* [http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107 Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use] —from the US Copyright Office
* [http://www.ipwatchdog.com/fairuse_cases.html Some more key fair use cases] —from IPWatchdog website
Economic Benefits of Fair Use
* [http://www.ccianet.org/artmanager/uploads/1/FairUseStudy-Sep12.pdf Computer and Communications Industry Association. "Economic Contribution of Industries Relying on Fair Use." September 2007]
Resources to learn about fair use:
* [http://www.centerforsocialmedia.org/files/pdf/fair_use_final.pdf Best Practices in Fair Use] by the American University Center for Social Media
* [http://fairusenetwork.org/ Fair Use Network] by the NYU Brennan Center for Justice,
Free Expression Policy Project
* [http://copyright.lib.utexas.edu/copypol2.html Fair Use of Copyrighted Materials] by Georgia Harper, The Copyright Crash Course, University of Texas at Austin Libraries
* [http://www.law.duke.edu/cspd/comics/ Bound by Law] by Duke University's Center for the Study of the Public Domain
* [http://copyright.iupui.edu/ Fair Use: Copyright Management Center] , with "Copyright Essentials" including a fair use checklist.
* [http://fairuse.stanford.edu/index.html Copyright and Fair Use] —from Stanford University Libraries
* [http://www.eff.org/ Electronic Frontier Foundation] —Working to defend digital rights
* [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJn_jC4FNDo YouTube video "A Fair(y) Use Tail",by
Eric Faden, produced by Media Education Foundation]
* [http://www.copyright.iupui.edu/checklist.pdf Checklist for fair use] (PDF)—from Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis
* [http://www.nolo.com/lawcenter/ency/article.cfm/objectID/C3E49F67-1AA3-4293-9312FE5C119B5806 "When Copying Is Okay: The 'Fair Use' Rule"] —from Nolo.com/Law for All
* [http://copylaw.com/new_articles/fairuse.html Fair Use in a Nutshell: A Roadmap to Copyright's Most Important Exception] —by Lloyd J. Jassin; from CopyLaw.com
* [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/events/SignalNoiseBBFINAL.pdf A Practical Guide to Fair Use Doctrine] (PDF)—from [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/sn/ Signal or Noise 2K5] at Harvard University
* [http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualproperty/copypol2.htm A guide to the circumstances of fair use] —from the University of Texas Systems Dept.
* [http://www.publaw.com/work.html How Much of Someone Else's Work May I Use Without Asking Permission?: The Fair Use Doctrine, Part I] and [http://www.publaw.com/fairuse.html Fair Use: Interpretations and Guidelines—The Fair Use Doctrine Part II] , "The Publishing Law Center"
* [http://www.starr.net/is/fu.html Fair Use chart.] Helps you remember the guidelines.
* [http://www.jamesshuggins.com/h/oth1/parody.htm Parody and Fair Use] An article on fair use and parody from James S. Huggins. Includes links to several rulings, including the [http://www.benedict.com/Audio/crew/crew.aspx Pretty Woman] parody.
ignificant meetings and conferences on fair use:
* [http://www.archive.org/details/NYIH_Comedies_of_Fair_Use/ The New York Institute for the Humanities Comedies of Fair U$e conference, 2006] at Archive.org; see also [http://newsgrist.typepad.com/comediesoffairuse/ notes at Newsgrist blog]
* [http://www.ccianet.org/artmanager/publish/news/First-Ever_Economic_Study_Calculates_Dollar_Value_of.shtml Article on the benefits of Fair Use to the U.S. ecomony]
* [http://www.ccianet.org/artmanager/uploads/1/FairUseStudy-Sep12.pdf Study of benefits Fair Use provides to U.S. economy]
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.
Look at other dictionaries:
Fair-use — Aux États Unis, le fair use (que l on peut traduire par « usage loyal », « usage raisonnable » ou « usage acceptable ») est un ensemble de règles de droit, d origine législative et jurisprudentielle, qui apportent… … Wikipédia en Français
Fair Use — Aux États Unis, le fair use (que l on peut traduire par « usage loyal », « usage raisonnable » ou « usage acceptable ») est un ensemble de règles de droit, d origine législative et jurisprudentielle, qui apportent… … Wikipédia en Français
fair use — see use 2 Merriam Webster's Dictionary of Law. Merriam Webster. 1996. fair use n. The legal use of cop … Law dictionary
fair use — ˌfair ˈuse noun [uncountable] LAW reasons given for using or copying a book, film, song etc without the permission of the person or company that owns or made it, that a court of law in the US can accept as reasonable; = fair dealing Bre * * *… … Financial and business terms
Fair use — Aux États Unis, le fair use (que l on peut traduire par « usage loyal[1] », « usage raisonnable » ou « usage acceptable ») est un ensemble de règles de droit, d origine législative et jurisprudentielle, qui apportent … Wikipédia en Français
Fair Use — Als Fair Use (deutsch: Angemessene Verwendung) bezeichnet man eine Rechtsdoktrin des anglo amerikanischen Urheberrechts Systems (z.B. US amerikanischem Copyright), die bestimmte, nicht autorisierte Nutzungen von geschütztem Material zugesteht,… … Deutsch Wikipedia
Fair-use — Als Fair Use (dt.: Angemessene Verwendung) bezeichnet man eine Rechtsdoktrin des anglo amerikanischen Copyright Systems, die bestimmte, nicht autorisierte Nutzungen von geschütztem Material zugesteht, sofern sie der öffentlichen Bildung und der… … Deutsch Wikipedia
Fair use — Als Fair Use (dt.: Angemessene Verwendung) bezeichnet man eine Rechtsdoktrin des anglo amerikanischen Copyright Systems, die bestimmte, nicht autorisierte Nutzungen von geschütztem Material zugesteht, sofern sie der öffentlichen Bildung und der… … Deutsch Wikipedia
Fair use — El uso legítimo o uso razonable es un criterio jurisprudencial desarrollado en el sistema del derecho anglosajón (o common law) que permite un uso limitado de material protegido sin necesitar permiso del dueño de dichos derechos, por ejemplo para … Wikipedia Español
fair use — noun a doctrine in intellectual property law that permits one party to make use of another partys protected intellectual property (such as a copyright or trademark) under narrowly defined circumstances Although fair use was not mentioned in the… … Wiktionary


text:
MONTREAL – Nicolo (Nick) Rizzuto Jr. was born in Canada on Dec. 4, 1967. He grew up on Antoine Berthelet St. in the north end of Montreal.
Rizzuto, named for his grandfather Nicolo, was the eldest of Vito Rizzuto and Giovanna Cammalleri's three children.
According to his business associate Tony Magi and several police sources, Nick Rizzuto was involved in real-estate development. According to police sources, he was involved in two residential projects in LaSalle and Lachine.
Although Nick Jr. was believed by police to have been involved in his father's affairs, his criminal record did not reflect a career in organized crime. From 1991 to 1994, he was convicted of impaired driving three times.
In 1995, Nick Rizzuto Jr. married the daughter of Emanuele Ragusa, a man considered to be a very influential figure in the Rizzuto organization. Ragusa received a lengthy prison term after pleading guilty to drug trafficking and money laundering.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Martin J. Surks, MDMartin J. Surks, MD, MACPProgram Director, Division of Endocrinology and MetabolismProfessor of Medicine (Endocrinology) and Pathology
As a senior member of the faculty of the Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism and Department of Medicine at Montefiore Medical Center and Albert Einstein College of Medicine, whose research and clinical interests have been focused on thyroid physiology and pathophysiology, I am in a unique position to comment on the pioneering thyroid research published by clinicians and scientists who have worked here, beginning in 1920. Findings from this body of research have benefited the health of hundreds of millions of people around the world.
Martin J. Surks, MD, MACPProfessor of Medicine (Endocrinology) and Pathology
I have spent most of my career at Montefiore Medical Center and the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, with offices and laboratories located at Montefiore Medical Center. As a senior member of the faculty of the Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism and Department of Medicine whose research and clinical interests have been focused on thyroid physiology and pathophysiology I am in a unique position to comment on the pioneering thyroid research published by clinicians and scientists who have worked here beginning in 1920. Findings from this body of research have benefited the health of hundreds of millions of people around the world.
Founded in 1884 by leaders of the Jewish community in New York, Montefiore was a hospital designated to care for patients with tuberculosis and other chronic illnesses. How a hospital established for patients with chronic diseases evolved into a major academic institution that valued research as well as clinical care is not clear. The transition occurred, at least in part, by recruitment of staff for clinical duties, who had research interests as well, and were productive both in the research and clinical arenas. Such was the case for Dr. David Marine, recruited as Chairman of Pathology and Director of Research Laboratories in 1920, and some of his successors. Marine remained in that position until retirement in 1945. Marine's work, as well as others, was supported mainly by Montefiore Hospital under the leadership of E.M Bluestone and Martin Cherkasky.
The e-published Montefiore Milestones provides a list of many "firsts" and signal achievements, but none related to thyroid disease. My objective here is simply to preserve what I can of the historical record of thyroid research at Montefiore Medical Center, as has been done for important achievements in other fields. I accumulated primary documents dating back to the mid-1940s from people who were there, many of whom were my distinguished teachers and colleagues, and friends. They are preserved electronically in the reference section. Since I am not a historian, I hope that this paper and accompanying primary sources may stimulate others to explore areas of interest in a more rigorous manner.
Background and Sources
The most prevalent thyroid disease in the world in the early 20th century was to be recognized later as an iodine deficiency disorder. It included endemic goiter, probable hypothyroidism and endemic cretinism. Its cause was unknown. We now know that iodine deficiency and hypothyroidism not only impairs quality of life but also adversely affects brain development and intellectual function, often permanently. Some estimates by the World Health Organization suggest an average 10 - 20% decrease in economic productivity in affected populations.
Hypothyroidism results from a decrease in secretion of thyroid hormone, l- thyroxine, by the thyroid gland. Iodine is an important component of l- thyroxine, 4 atoms per molecule, reported by EC Kendall in 1915. The iodine content was correct but his proposed chemical structure (an indole) was not. Its structure, synthesis and biological activity in man was reported by Harrington and colleagues in 1925. Kendall went on to determine the structure of cortisone in the mid-1940s, and, with Hench, showed its profound anti-inflammatory effects in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, leading to a Nobel Prize in 1950 for them and T. Reichstein.
Iodine is a trace element and is distributed unevenly in the earth's crust, being relatively abundant in coastal areas and progressively more and more scarce inland. Since most of the world's population lived inland, hundreds of millions of people were affected by iodine deficiency. It was David Marine who established in laboratory investigations an association between iodine deficiency and thyroid hyperplasia and goiter. He proposed that endemic goiter was due to iodine deficiency, could be reversed and /or prevented by iodine supplementation and carried out the clinical studies to confirm these hypotheses.
O.P. Kimball, who worked and published with Marine on the epidemiological studies, summarized the classic studies and subsequent history of iodine supplementation in salt, up to 1961. According to Kimball, "The prevention of endemic goiter in man, as it is known today throughout the world, is based entirely on the findings and teachings of David Marine."
I met Josef Matovinovic at my first meeting of the American Thyroid Association in 1969. Learning that I was at Montefiore, he shared with me Marine's seminal accomplishments. Subsequently, he sent me his publication, which is both a homage to and summary of Marine's work, replete with Marine's personal reflections of his research, obtained during interviews.
The Research
Marine graduated from Johns Hopkins Medical School in 1905, became the first pathologist interested in thyroid disease, initially working in Cleveland, Ohio, an epicenter of endemic goiter both in man and animals. He came to Montefiore Hospital as Chairman of Pathology and Director of Research Laboratories in 1920. His seminal epidemiologic study, reported in 1920, showed that 56% of schoolgirls in Akron, Ohio had goiter, which regressed in 66% of children who took twice yearly iodine supplementation. Separately, while less than 1% of children without goiter developed goiter when treated similarly with iodine, about 20% of girls not taking iodine developed goiter in a 2 ½ year observation period. The studies were the first to show that endemic goiter resulted from iodine deficiency, and could be both treated as well as prevented with iodine supplementation.
His studies were widely confirmed and stimulated introduction of iodine supplementation of salt, addition to water supplies, annual injections of iodinated oils, or other approaches suitable to geographic, cultural, political and religious practices in different populations. Successful iodine supplementation resulted in elimination of iodine deficiency diseases, including endemic cretinism, in those areas which were rendered iodine sufficient.
Subsequent studies by Marine and colleagues and others focused on how to supplement iodine in populations, iodized salt in North America, in order to prevent endemic goiter and cretinism. These studies continue even today, principally in Asia, Africa and South America . Josef Matovinovic told me that Marine was nominated but did not receive the Nobel Prize for this work, but he did not document that in his paper. I was not able to find a listing of nominees for the Nobel Prize in order to confirm this contention.
Other Important Contributions
A second major chapter in thyroid research at Montefiore Medical Center was the development of the Medical Physics Laboratory, immediately at the end of World War II. This unit, along with only a few others in the United States, studied the uses of radioactive iodine (I-131) in investigations of thyroid physiology and treatment of thyroid diseases. The leader of this research at Montefiore Medical Center was Samuel M. Seidlin, a practicing endocrinologist, Chief of Endocrinology and part-time investigator.
Dr. Samuel Seidlin's pioneering work using radioiodine for diagnosis and therapy of thyroid cancer during the early1940s, published widely in the medical literature and lay press, e.g. LIFE Magazine, made Montefiore known around the world. Observations by Seidlin and colleagues remain the basis for treatment of thyroid cancer and some other thyroid disorders even to this day.
I obtained most of the details concerning this period from a published historical vignette of the beginning of radioiodine therapy of thyroid cancer, and memoir of Samuel M Seidlin by Edward Siegel, PhD, who was Physicist-in-Charge of the Medical Physics Laboratory and Radiation Protection Officer at Montefiore Hospital between 1948 and 1962. Dr. Siegel generously provided me his curriculum vita, listing important publications from the laboratory. Also, at my request, he gave me an unpublished document he prepared for the Montefiore Archives in 1984, on the occasion of the hospital's 100th Anniversary, describing his personal recollections of his tenure at Montefiore Hospital.
Additional details were provided to me by Bernard A. Sachs, MD (see curriculum vita), who was my friend and one of my teachers. He became a member of the Radioisotope Board in 1952, which still meets weekly, and was its Chairman between 1963 and 1976. Bernie was a practicing endocrinologist, who was Chief of the Endocrine Clinic (1955-1968), which still meets weekly, Head of the Endocrine Service (1960-1968), and Senior Endocrinologist (1968-1976). Bernie established an Endocrine Training Program, which combined with the training program of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, in 1988. The Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism is headed by Norman Fleischer, MD, and I remain the Program Director of the training program, which has evolved into one of the premier programs in the country. Dr. Sachs also founded and directed the Lipid Metabolism Laboratory (1952 - 1976) and was a Director of the Coronary Drug Project, a multicenter trial to compare effects of estrogen, clofibrate, and D- thyroxine on lowering of blood lipids.
Finally, I had hundreds of interactions with a number of voluntary Attending Physicians who were there, participating in the weekly meetings of the Isotope Board and, variably, in the research that emanated from the Unit. They include Joseph Krakauer, Arthur Bauman, Frank A. Graig, Theodore Spaet, Stanley Kass and Kenneth Rosenheck. They were my teachers and friends, some for decades. In fact, I still use daily in my practice, a Hertel Exophthalmometer, given to me by Frank Graig when he retired from endocrine practice to become Chief of Medicine at Grasslands Hospital, now Westchester Medical Center.
The continuing transformation of Montefiore Hospital from a chronic disease facility to a comprehensive medical center that stressed both general clinical care and clinical investigation was accelerated by the appointment of Dr. Louis Leiter as Chairman of Medicine. Dr. Leiter had published important studies on kidney disease and was an elected member of the prestigious academic societies, the American Society of Clinical Investigation (nickname, "the Young Turks"), and the Association of American Physicians (nickname, "the Old Turks"). He was my Chairman during Internal Medicine training and became a good friend and strong supporter. Samuel Seidlin was one of his first clinical appointments.
Soon after arriving at Montefiore, Seidlin discovered a patient (BB) with severe thyrotoxicosis living on the wards of the hospital. BB had metastatic thyroid cancer, and had a thyroidectomy nearly 20 years earlier. Since his thyroid gland was removed, Seidlin considered the possibility that his known metastases were functional, i.e., producing thyroid hormone in excess, causing thyrotoxicosis. With physicist, L.D Marinelli, he obtained radioiodine made in the cyclotron at MIT-Harvard and administered some to BB. Scanning BB with a hand-held Geiger counter gave startling results. All known metastases were highly functional, and an additional skull metastasis was discovered by scanning the area at BB's request because of pain in his skull that "was not a headache". Dr. David Marine was there and commented that he had seen many thyroid metastases over the years but this was the first time he heard metastases "talk" (the audible clicks of the Geiger counter). Seidlin's group treated BB in 1943, and then repeatedly with radioiodine, until the metastatic lesions no longer accumulated the isotope (1949). His pain disappeared, thyrotoxicosis remitted and he regained his body weight. No new lesions appeared and some completely disappeared over a period of nearly 10 years. BB died in 1952 with autopsy proven anaplastic carcinoma, thought to be due to the large amounts of radioiodine he had received.
From left: B.B. before treatment (1943), B.B. after treatment (1949)Over the years, more than 30 patients with metastatic thyroid cancer were studied, and 16 with functioning metastases were treated with radioiodine. All had total thyroidectomy before treatment so that normal thyroid tissue did not compete with the metastases for the administered isotope.
At the time of the first treatment of BB, there were only 2 other laboratories in the United States that were studying radioiodine in man, and none had treated a comparable patient. The success of the treatment in this patient was widely publicized in the medical literature (5, 7) and the lay press (Life Magazine). Major figures from all over the world came to Montefiore to learn from this experience and for advice on setting up their own isotope facilities (7) .
After Seidlin's death in 1955, the Medical Physics Laboratory continued to make important contributions to the diagnosis and management of thyroid disease. A long list of publications emanated from the laboratory (5, 7). Particularly notable was the finding that technetium localized to but was not retained by the thyroid, and that agent is still used today. Also, Montefiore contributed 603 carefully followed patients, who had been treated with radioiodine for hyperthyroidism, to a national cooperative study to determine the safety of this therapeutic approach. The long term incidence of thyroid cancer after radioiodine treatment of hyperthyroidism was lower than that of patients treated with antithyroid drugs. Thus, both the effectiveness and safety of the first treatment of a non-malignant disease with radioisotopes was established.
The Medical Physics Laboratory was so active in patient management and research that, in the 1950s, it was the largest consumer of radioiodine in the world (per Dr. Abersold, Atomic Energy Commission (5, 7)). The laboratory gradually evolved into the Department of Nuclear Medicine.
Vignette Concerning the Medical Physics Laboratory and Rosalyn S. Yalow, PhD, Nobel Laureate
Question: Did Dr Rosalyn Yalow cross paths with Dr Seidlin and colleagues at the Medical Physics Laboratory at Montefiore, before establishing the isotope laboratory at the VA Hospital, Bronx, NY?
Aaron Yalow and Rosalyn Sussman, 2 young physicists met during postdoctoral training in the Midwest . After they married and returned to New York , Aaron took a position with the Medical Physics Laboratory at Montefiore and for many years participated in the research efforts of the group. He is coauthor of papers published from the laboratory, and continued as a consultant both to the laboratory and to other laboratories using radioisotopes, including those of Jack H. Oppenheimer and Martin J. Surks.
Rosalyn S. Yalow, PhD
Dr. Rosalyn (now) Yalow was recruited by the Veterans Administration Hospital, Bronx , NY to develop an isotope unit. She was quickly joined by Solomon A. Berson, MD. Their joint investigations first in thyroid disease and then on the metabolism of radioactively labeled proteins, including albumin and insulin, led to important findings that resulted in development of the radioimmunoassay, a new type of measurement that quickly revolutionized biology and medicine. Their new technology enabled measurements of biological substances, including hormones, at picomolar concentrations. Their classic paper on insulin binding to globulins was initially rejected by the Journal of Clinical Investigation. Their work eventually resulted in a Nobel Prize to Dr Yalow. Unfortunately, Sol Berson met an untimely early death and could not share the prize, which is not awarded posthumously.
Solomon A. Berson, MD
Since the VA Hospital was only several miles away from Montefiore Hospital , and since her husband was working in the Medical Physics Laboratory; it would be no surprise if Rosalyn Yalow obtained some experience in that laboratory that may have helped her develop the new isotope facility at the VA. I recalled hearing that this was the case in a talk by David V. Becker, MD, Chief Division of Nuclear Medicine at New York Hospital , in his Presidential Lecture to the American Thyroid Association in 1983. He mentioned that Ros had spent some time at the Medical Physics Laboratory at Montefiore Hospital . However, I was unable to find documentation for this in her biography, autobiography, the Internet or from discussions with Jesse Roth, MD Jesse, s friend of long duration, was a Fellow at the VA in 1961-3, when I was a medical resident there (Sol Berson was my Attending in Medicine for 4 months). Jesse and Shimon Glick, his co-Fellow, developed a radioimmunoassay for Growth Hormone and demonstrated the dependence of growth hormone secretion on blood glucose.
Through the courtesy of a distinguished colleague and friend, James Hurley, MD, now Emeritus Associate Professor of Medicine, who was a long time colleague and close friend of David Becker, I obtained a copy of David Becker's presidential address to the members of the American Thyroid Association, given on October 7, 1983. He related a personal communication to him from Ros that mentioned her association with the Medical Physics Laboratory at Montefiore before she worked at the VA Hospital.
David's address was extensively documented and includes a copy of a footnote on page 843 from the classic 1946 JAMA paper of Seidlin et al. The footnote states: "Dr. E. J. Baumann, Chemistry Department, Montefiore Hospital , developed a procedure for extracting iodine from the urine so that it could be refed to the patient in the form of sodium iodide. This technique was utilized whenever the amount of I* involved warranted it. The efficiency of recovery was consistently high, 80 to 95%."
Later in David's talk: "To maximize the effect from the expensive isotope. Emil J Baumann who ran the chemistry laboratory at Montefiore Hospital and who had collaborated with David Marine on many thyroid studies extracted the radioiodine from the patient's urine so it could be re-administered. A young volunteer was assigned the task of purifying the urine. Her name was Roslyn Sussman and she had recently married Aaron Yalow, a physicist on their team. She tells me that it was her first clinical exposure to radioiodine"
It is interesting to conjecture that this cross-fertilization may have contributed to the fact that the initial published studies of Berson and Yalow, with another friend, Dr. Arthur J. Bauman, from the new VA Laboratory focused on the thyroid.
The third chapter, which overlapped the second, began with the recruitment of my mentor and friend, Dr Jack H. Oppenheimer, who established the Endocrine Research Laboratory at Montefiore in 1960. His laboratory became famous throughout the world for a series of important research findings on thyroid physiology, pathophysiology, disease and mechanisms of action of thyroid hormones.
Jack's initial interest was neuroendocrinology and, to that end, during Fellowship in Endocrinology at Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons. He did a study of thyroid levels (measured as protein-bound iodine) in patients with seizures, most treated with phenytoin (Dilantin). The neurology residents tried to dissuade him, telling him that thyroid levels were always low in these patients, a finding that had never been reported. Jack's study confirmed their impression and showed that the fall in thyroid levels occurred within a few days after treatment with Dilantin started.
Jack's extraordinary talent was always to jump forward from even simple clinical observations made in man or animals to work out their mechanism. In this case, now at Montefiore, he showed that Dilantin competed with thyroxine for binding sites on the specific proteins that transported thyroid hormone in blood to tissues throughout the body, and in a further study that structural analogues of Dilantin, interacted in a manner consistent with their degree of homology with the hormone (11). His studies with thyroid binding proteins, above, stimulated him to develop the first practical method for measurement of free thyroid hormones, thought to be the biologically active form of the hormone. His findings in this area are the basis for Free T4 measurement used widely around the world today.
He then isolated a third binding protein, thyroxine-binding prealbumin, now called transthyretin, and studied its metabolism in man. Jack was the first experimental subject to receive this isotopically labeled protein and I was the second. He put these findings together in a classic study of the effect of nonthyroidal disease on free T4 and the binding proteins that still forms the basis of how we think about influence of illness and other catabolic states on the thyroid system. This is usually called either the euthyroid sick or low T3 syndrome. When methods became available for T3 measurement, he and colleagues showed that nonthyroidal disease or any catabolic state, including restriction of calories alone, was associated with a decrease in serum T3 and Free T3.
His next years at Montefiore focused on two lines of research. First were quantitative studies of T4 and T3 metabolism, which established the extent of T4 conversion toT3, and showed that the effect of propylthiouracil on lowering T3 in blood was due to inhibition of the conversion reaction, coming to the remarkable conclusion that T3, not T4, was the principal thyroid hormone. Metabolic studies in man, in which both of us were again subjects, suggested that the dose of thyroxine used for treatment of hypothyroidism, 300 ug per day at that time, was much too large. Using the newly developed assay for thyrotropin ( TSH ), he and colleagues showed that the average replacement dose was actually about 150 ug per day, a finding that had enormous impact on patient care around the world.
The second line of research was on the consequences of rate of entry of thyroid hormones from plasma to tissues. Prevailing concepts were that thyroid hormone in blood enters tissues slowly, accounting for the relatively slow biological effects of the hormone. He showed that the opposite was true, that thyroid hormones in blood rapidly exchanged with thyroid hormones in tissues, and that the exchange rates could be manipulated by the use of certain drugs, such as Phenobarbital. Although thyroid hormone was bound to all subcellular fractions, only the nucleus had a limited number of binding sites, which, when characterized, had all attributes of hormone receptors ; i.e. binding sites that were directly linked to biological effects of the hormone. That conclusion was proven correct with the subsequent cloning of the thyroid hormone receptors some years later.
At Montefiore, he moved quickly up the ranks to Professor of Medicine, and Head of the Division of Endocrinology, succeeding Dr Bernard Sachs. He moved to the University of Minnesota in 1976 to be Director of the Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, and the Thyroid Research Unit, and was Professor of Medicine, Cell Biology and Neuroscience.
Along with many Fellows and colleagues, he continued to be very productive studying the regulation by thyroid receptors of various gene products. His laboratory reported a series of papers on molecular mechanisms underlying thyroid hormone-stimulated lipogenesis, another series on identification of the S14 gene as a primary target for rapid thyroid hormone action and model for studies of the molecular mechanisms of thyroid-stimulated lipid synthesis and, a new area, involving the molecular mechanisms underlying hormone-dependent brain development. Still concerned with clinical thyroidology, he reported on regulation of TSH by T4 and T3, and on the dosage of thyroxine required for management of thyroid cancer. His curriculum vita lists nearly 270 peer-reviewed research papers.
Jack Oppenheimer was widely recognized as one of the most productive and original clinical investigators in the world. He was elected to prestigious academic societies, the American Society of Clinical Investigation and the Association of American Physicians, served on Editorial Boards of prestigious Journals, and on the Endocrine Study Section of the National Institute of Health. He was very active in the American Thyroid Association, chairing many committees, serving on its Council, and was elected its President (1985). He received the Van Meter Award for outstanding research by a young investigator, (1965) and its Distinguished Service Award (1992). He was widely sought after as Visiting Professor both in the United States and internationally. He trained nearly 75 endocrine fellows and graduate students. Beginning at Montefiore, Jack was considered to be one of the most outstanding clinical scientists of his time.
The fourth and still ongoing chapter describes the contributions of Dr. Martin I. Surks, who trained in Internal Medicine at Montefiore (Dr. Louis Leiter) and at the Bronx VA Hospital (Drs. Julius Wolf and Solomon Berson), then in Endocrinology with Dr. Jack Oppenheimer. He came to Montefiore to train in general medicine because all PGY-1 positions required training in surgery and pediatrics as well as medicine. Although his goal was to practice medicine, he was also impressed that the hospital supported a metabolic ward for research.
A career changing chance meeting with Jack Oppenheimer redirected him to endocrinology. He admitted a 55-year old with a mild urinary tract infection. The patient seemed to have low intelligence, doing menial work for the New York City Parks Department. Examination revealed a left Babinski sign. Surks remembers being in the X-ray reading room trying to interpret the patient's clearly abnormal skull X-ray, when a voice behind him said, "I see you have a case of hypoparathyroidism here." Of course, it was Jack. He helped Surks and his resident, David Levenson, evaluate and treat the patient. Serum calcium, which took several days to measure, was very low and phosphorus was high. Since history was negative for primary causes, Jack suggested we do a workup for pseudohypoparathyroidism, only 45 cases previously reported in the literature. Surks and David Levenson were controls for the Ellsworth-Howard tests then employed to determine whether the PTH extract was bioactive. The findings showed that the crude parathyroid extract, then available, was active, but the patient did not respond to it. Nor did he raise serum calcium after repeated PTH injections. Both findings supported the diagnosis of pseudohypoparathyroidism. A published report with David Levenson was Dr. Surks' first paper, and stimulated him to spend time in Jack's laboratory.
After a productive NIH-sponsored Fellowship under Jack, he obtained a research position in the US Army, stationed at the Medical Research and Nutrition Laboratory at Fitzsimons General Hospital, Denver, CO. Assigned to study the effects of high altitude exposure on human performance, he published a number of studies focused on thyroid hormone and protein metabolism at high altitude, Pike's Peak, CO, 14,010 feet. The most important was a demonstration of marked loss of water from the plasma and extracellular compartment, without decrease in total body water. The shift in body water from the extracellular to the intracellular compartment likely contributes to the frequently disabling high altitude headache, a finding supported by recent studies that employed MRI techniques.
He returned to Montefiore and continued to work on high altitude effects on cellular metabolism and also worked closely with Jack Oppenheimer on studies of thyroid hormone turnover and absorption. He developed reagents to set up radioimmunoassays for T4 and T3, and a TSH assay with reagents from the National Pituitary Agency, NIH. These assays formed the basis of the Endocrine Diagnostic Laboratory at Montefiore, which still prospers today. He studied patterns of serum T4 and T3 concentrations after patients ingested various thyroid hormone preparations then available for hormone replacement, and on a major revision of dosage of levothyroxine in hypothyroid patients.
When Jack Oppenheimer moved to Minnesota in 1976, Dr. Surks was appointed his successor, and in 1978, Professor of Medicine. In addition to developing the endocrine training program and endocrine division and providing voluntary service to the endocrine community, his laboratory pursued several lines of research, funded by the National Institutes of Health. With a number of colleagues, particularly Dr.Charles DeFesi, he developed methods for determining the number of pituitary cells in rat pituitary, particularly thyrotrophs ( TSH secreting) and somatotrophs (GH secreting), and their dependence on thyroid state. In contrast to the then prevailing concept that pituitary progenitor cells could evolve into specific cell lines, they showed unique thyroid hormone regulated rates of replication and degradation of the individual cell populations.
He further studied animal models of nonthyroidal disease, the tumor bearing rat, and effect of tumor on regulation of T3 receptors and response to T3. In cultured GC (GH-producing), his group reported dependence of cell replication and amino acid uptake on T3, that the effect occurred early in the G1 phase of the cell cycle, that the S phase (DNA synthesis) was associated with a doubling of T3 receptors in parallel with DNA, and that, in rats, T3 increased the secretion of GH and GH mRNA, and decreased TSH secretion and B-TSH mRNA.
Another line of research focused on development of method for measurement of Free T4, in undiluted serum, at physiologic temperature and pH. Those studies in collaboration with Drs. Kenneth Hupart and Charles DeFesi showed that Free T4 was unchanged even in severe nonthyroidal disease and also led to an understanding of the mechanism of the Dilantin-induced decrease in serum T4 and Free T4 that was described first by Jack Oppenheimer (see above). The laboratory showed that the Dilantin effect was only a laboratory artifact since Free T4 was unchanged in Dilantin-treated patients when measured in undiluted serum.
During the last decade, Surks has been a key contributor to the debate on the TSH reference range and subclinical hypothyroidism. He chaired the evidence-based consensus development conference on subclinical hypothyroidism, and with colleagues argued against the abrupt recommendation to decrease the upper reference limit for TSH to 2.5 mIU/L, a recommendation that still remains unsupported by new data.
Since the prevalence of subclinical hypothyroidism is nearly 15% in apparently thyroid disease-free older people, Surks and Joseph G. Hollowell studied that group intensely. They demonstrated that older people, as a population, shift their TSH distribution to higher values, and that about 50% of older people thought to have subclinical hypothyroidism based on a minimal increase in TSH , have values within their age-specific reference limit. Thus, the prevalence of subclinical hypothyroidism appears significantly overestimated, a finding that influences the categorization of millions of older people with or without thyroid disease. Further studies with Laura Boucai confirmed the observations and also showed specificity of TSH distribution in different race and ethnic groups. These very recent studies argue strongly for development of age- and race/ethnic-specific reference limits for TSH in order to minimize misclassification of people with thyroid disease, particularly older people, Finally, studies done in collaboration with colleagues at the Ageing Institute at Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Gil Atzmon, Ilan Gabriely and Nir Barzilai showed that the age-related shift in TSH distribution to higher values with age was genetically determined and associated with 2 SNPs in the TSH receptor that may contribute to longevity.
Dr. Surks was recognized for his contributions to thyroid research by election to prestigious scientific academic societies, the American Society for Clinical Investigation, the Association of American Physicians, and the Interurban Clinical Club. He received a Mastership from the American College of Physicians. His Curriculum Vitae lists 210 publications. He served on Editorial Boards of Endocrinology and the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism and on grant review boards for the Veterans Administration and the National Institute of Health. He was a member of the Endocrine Section of the American Board of Internal Medicine and its Chairman for 4 years. He was a founder of both the Endocrine Self Assessment Program and its Editor-in-Chief and of the Association of Program Directors of Endocrinology and Metabolism and served as its President. He was very active in the American Thyroid Association, serving as its Secretary, (COO) for 5 years and its President. Dr. Surks was given its Van Meter Award for research and its Distinguished Service Award. He was also awarded d the Sidney H. Ingbar Distinguished Service Award by the Endocrine Society for service to the field. He has trained 70 Fellows and continues as Program Director of the endocrine training program at Albert Einstein College of Medicine.
Diabetes Research Center Conferences
Grand Rounds
Work in Progress


text:
We use cookies to enhance your online experience. By continuing to browse this site, you agree to accept them. Learn more here.
Our stores are now open! Shop In-Store, Online or via our Contact Centre.
Throw on a stylish layer with our Joe Browns' women's knitwear. Our autumn collection is filled with fabulous designs, bold colours and flattering finishes, so we've got unique women's knitwear to suit every style!
Go quirky with colour or cosy up with a cable knit. No matter which you choose, our women's chunky knit jumpers and cardigans will keep you warm on those cooler British days!
7 Items


text:
A's know better than to count Angels out
ANAHEIM -- If there's any team in baseball that knows better than to write off another struggling club at the All-Star break, it's the Oakland A's. When the Midsummer Classic hit last season, they were 43-43 and nine games behind the Rangers.
So with the Angels in a similar situation this year -- currently nine games behind first-place Oakland after winning the first two games of the weekend series, A's manager Bob Melvin knows his SoCal rivals are far from finished.
"We were at .500 at the break and came out and played well and ended up winning the division," Melvin said. "I don't discount anybody at this point, especially not a team that's as talented as they are."
The Angels have struggled all season, but have shown occasional flashes of becoming the title contender many thought they'd be when the season opened. The only question is whether they can sustain it.
"It's a good team," Melvin said. "They're going to play good baseball at some point in time, as they did last year -- it was just a little late for them last year. But I think [it's open] for any team right now."


text:
ECON-2302-60 - Prinof Microeconomics
Lamar State College - Port Arthur
House Bill 2504
Fall 2015 Course Syllabus
ECON-2302-60 - Prinof Microeconomics
|Faculty Information
|Fall 2015
|Bryant, Jennifer Christine
|(409) 984-6389
|Be sure to check your campus E-mail and Course Homepage using MyLamarPA campus web portal (My.LamarPA.edu). When youÆve logged in, click the email icon in the upper right-hand corner to check email, or click on the ōMy Coursesö tab to get to your Course Homepage. Click the link to your course and review the information presented. It is important that you check your email and Course Homepage regularly. You can also access your grades, transcripts, and determine who your academic advisor is by using MyLamarPA.
|Course Information
|Course Number
|Course Description
|Analysis of the behavior of individual economic agents, including consumer behavior and demand, producer behavior and supply, price and output decisions by firms under various market structures, factor markets, market failures, and international trade.
|Course Prerequisites
|Prerequisite: Basic skills competency in reading and writing.
|Required Textbooks
|McConnell, C, Brue, S, & Flynn, S. (2015). MicroEconomics w/ Connect Plus. Custom Edition. McGraw-HillIrwin. 20TH Edition ISBN- 9781259335686
|Attendance Policy
|Regular and punctual attendance is important to the attainment of the educational objectives of this course. Therefore you are responsible for any covered content and missed assignments. 5 absences will result in a drop of a letter grade.
|Course Grading Scale
|90 - 100 = A 80 - 89 = B 70 - 79 = C 60 - 69 = D Below 59 = F
|Determination of Final Grade
|Exams 40%, Assignments 30%, Participation 30%
|Final Exam Date
|December 9, 2015 - 9:00 AM
|Major Assignments
Week 1:Limits, Alternatives, and Choices, Quiz, Learnsmart
Week 2:The Market System and the Circular Flow, Quiz, Learnsmart
Week 3:Demands, Supply, and Market Equilibrium, Last word Paper, Learnsmart
Week 4:Elasticity, Quiz, Learnsmart
Week 5:Market Failures: Public Goods and Externalities, Quiz, Learnsmart
Week 6:Consumer Behavior, Quiz, Learnsmart
Week 7:Businesses and the Costs of Production,
Week 8:Pure competition in the short run, Quiz, Learnsmart
Week 9:Pure competition in the long run, Quiz, Learnsmart
Week 10: Pure Monopoly, Consider this Paper, Learnsmart
Week 11: Monopolistic Competition and Oligopoly, Quiz, Learnsmart
Week 12:The Demand for Resources, Quiz, Learnsmart
Week 13:Wage Determination, Quiz, Learnsmart
Week 14: Rent,Interest and Profit, Learnsmart, Quiz
Week 15: Final Review
Week 16:Final Exam
|Calendar of Lecture Topics and Major Assignment Due Dates
Week 1:Limits, Alternatives, and Choices
Week 2:The Market System and the Circular Flow
Week 3:Demands, Supply, and Market Equilibrium
Week 4:Elasticity
Week 5:Market Failures: Public Goods and Externalities
Week 6:Consumer Behavior
Week 7:Businesses and the Costs of Production
Week 8:Pure competition in the short run
Week 9:Pure competition in the long run
Week 10:Pure Monopoly
Week 11: Monopolistic Competition and Oligopoly
Week 12:The Demand for Resources
Week 13:Wage Determination
Week 14:Rent, Interest and Profit
Week 15:Final Review
Week 16:Final Exam: May 13th
|General Education/Core Curriculum Student Learning Outcomes
|Program Student Learning Outcomes
PSLO ALPHA: Reading skills - Demonstrates comprehension of content-area reading material.
Identifies all main ideas, supporting details, and vocabulary in reading material; demonstrates a full understanding of the reading.
PSLO 1: Critical Thinking Skills ¢ Uses creative thinking, innovation, inquiry and analysis, evaluation and synthesis of information.
Creatively identifies problem, argument, or issue (to determine extent of information needed); differentiates the facts from opinions as relates to situation; constructs possible solutions or prediction or consequences; uses logical, sound reasoning to justify conclusion.
PSLO 2: Communication Skills ¢ Demonstrates effective development, interpretation and expression of ideas through written, oral and/or visual communication.
Expresses a strong thesis; organizes information with effective transitions & sequencing of ideas; uses substantial, logical & specific development of ideas; details are relevant, original, credible and correctly documented when appropriate to show an effective development and interpretation of ideas; and presents ideas in appropriate mode of expression for the task.
PSLO3: Empirical and Quantitative Skills ¢ Applies the manipulation and/or analysis of numerical data or observable facts resulting in informed conclusions.
Identifies mathematical or scientific principles needed to complete task; uses mathematical or scientific principles needed to complete task; analyzes how to use the principles; and applies problem-solving skills in mathematical or scientific principles needed to complete task with correct informed conclusions.
PSLO 5: Social Responsibility Skills - Expresses intercultural competence, knowledge of civic responsibility, and the ability to engage effectively in regional, national, and global communities.
Identifies cultural characteristics (including beliefs, values, perspectives and/or practices); demonstrates knowledge of civic responsibility; provides evidence of experience in civic- engagement activities; and describes what she/ he has learned as it relates to a reinforced and clarified sense of civic identity in local, regional, national, or global communities; and shows awareness of oneÆs own culture in relation to others.
|Course Student Learning Outcomes
Upon successful completion of this course, students will:
CLSO ALPHA: Reading skills - Demonstrates comprehension of content-area reading material. Measured by pre-post data
1. Explain the role of scarcity, specialization, opportunity cost and cost/benefit analysis in economic decision-making.(PSLO Alpha measured by embedded quiz questions)
2. Identify the determinants of supply and demand; demonstrate the impact of shifts in both market supply and demand curves on equilibrium price and output.(PSLO 1 measured by embedded quiz questions)
3. Summarize the law of diminishing marginal utility; describe the process of utility maximization.(PSLO Alpha measured by embedded quiz questions)
4. Calculate supply and demand elasticities, identify the determinants of price elasticity of demand and supply, and demonstrate the relationship between elasticity and total revenue.(PSLO 3 measured by embedded quiz questions)
5. Describe the production function and the Law of Diminishing Marginal Productivity; calculate and graph short-run and long-run costs of production.(PSLO Alpha & 3 measured by embedded quiz questions)
6. Identify the four market structures by characteristics; calculate and graph the profit maximizing price and quantity in the output markets by use of marginal analysis.(PSLO Alpha measured by embedded quiz questions)
7. Determine the profit maximizing price and quantity of resources in factor markets under perfect and imperfect competition by use of marginal analysis.(PSLO 3 measured by embedded quiz questions)
8. Describe governmental efforts to address market failure such as monopoly power, externalities, and public goods.(PSLO 2 measured by embedded quiz questions)
9. Identify the benefits of free trade using the concept of comparative advantage.(PSLO 5 measured by embedded quiz questions)
|Academic Honesty
|Academic honesty is expected from all students, and dishonesty in any form will not be tolerated. Please consult the LSC-PA policies (Section IX, subsection A, in the Faculty Handbook) for consequences of academic dishonesty.
|Facility Policies
|Additional Information
|Please do not hesitate to contact me via email or phone with any questions or concerns. My physical and virtual door is always open. Communication is key to a successful course outcome. Latework is not accepted.
|Important Information
|ADA Considerations
|The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a federal anti-discrimination statute that provides comprehensive civil rights for persons with disabilities. Among other things, this legislation requires that all students with disabilities be guaranteed a learning environment that provides for reasonable accommodation of their disabilities. If you believe you have a disability requiring an accommodation, please contact the Special Populations Coordinator, Room 231, in the Madison Monroe Building. The phone number is (409) 984-6241.
|Copyright Violations
Some material in this course may be copyrighted. They may be used only for instructional purposes this semester,
by students enrolled in this course. These materials are being used fairly and legally.
No one may distribute or share these copyrighted materials in any medium or format with anyone outside this class,
including publishing essays with copyrighted material, uploading copyrighted material to Facebook or YouTube, or
painting or performing copyrighted material for public display.
Copyright violation is not the same thing as plagiarism. Plagiarism is intellectual dishonesty. Offenses of plagiarism result in lower grades or failing scores, and professors and the college strictly enforce plagiarism rules. There is never any acceptable use of plagiarism. Copyright violation is a legal offense, punishable by large fines and penalties.
Copyrighted material can be used if permission from the materialÆs creator is obtained, or if its use meets the standards of fair use in an educational setting. For example, a student can quote a line from ShakespeareÆs Hamlet in a report without violating copyright but still be guilty of plagiarism if the quotation is not properly documented.
If you are in doubt about what material can be freely used, ask your professor or contact the Dean of Library Services, at (409) 984-6216.
|Assessment Statement
Assessment is a process by which LSCPA can help you learn better and gauge the level of progress you have made to
attain knowledge, skills, beliefs, and values. It also helps your professors understand how to improve teaching
and testing methods in your classes, and it helps each department understand and improve degree and certificate
Periodically LSC-PA will collect assessment data for research and reporting purposes, including statistical data and sometimes copies of your work. Be assured that all material the college uses for assessment purposes will be kept confidential. To ensure anonymity, your name will be removed from any material we use for assessment purposes, including video-recorded performances, speeches, and projects.
If you object to allowing LSC-PA to use your material for assessment purposes, submit a letter stating so to your professor by the 12th class day. You will still be required to participate in whatever assessments are being done; we just wonÆt use your data.
WhatÆs the difference between assessment and grades? The grades you get on papers, projects, speeches, and assignments are specific types of focused assessment. LSC-PAÆs assessment efforts include class grades, surveys, standardized tests, and other tools.
|Privacy Notice
Federal privacy laws apply to college students. This means that college employees, including instructors, cannot
divulge information to third parties, including parents and legal guardians of students. Even if the students are
minors, information about their college work cannot be shared with anyone except in very limited circumstances.
Anyone requesting information about a student should be referred to the Registrar. Instructors will be notified in writing by that Office about what information may be released and to whom.
Please remember that releasing private information about a student, however innocuous it may seem, can be a violation of federal law, with very serious consequences.
Circumstances under which information may be released:
An adult student may submit, to the Registrar, a handwritten, signed note granting permission for release of
information. The note must specify what information may be divulged, and it must specify the name of the person
to whom the information may be given.
The RegistrarÆs office is located in the Student Center room 303B, and can be reached at (409) 984-6165.
|College-Level Perspectives
This course helps add to the studentsÆ overall collegiate experience in the following ways:
|Degree Plan Evaluation
A Degree Plan Evaluation will help you determine which classes you need to complete your program.
All of the classes that you have taken that apply to your declared major will be listed on the right. If you have a class that still needs to be completed, a ōNOö will be listed on the right next to the required class.
|This syllabus is part of LSC-PAÆs efforts to comply with Texas House Bill 2504.
Copyright ©2011 Lamar State College - Port Arthur. All Rights Reserved.