When it comes to this case I personally believe that this is not a form of copyright. This company does not know if this radio station is the actual name of a person or if it is after their character. The school is not showing any images or anything that identifies directly to their book character. This radio is also introducing students to other books to read so it is an educational use. It changes the idea of pooh and makes it their own thing which does not fall under copyright for educators.
The four factors of fair use the purpose of the use, the nature of the copyrighted work, the amount used, and the market impact (Hobbs, 19). When it comes to the purpose of this name use, it is for an educational school radio to help introduce children to new books to read. The nature of the material is a children's book and the books that are being read are bought (probably) either by a teacher or the school so those are allowed to be shared in the school. The amount of this book used is just the character's name. It does not even include any other characters or details from the Winnie the Pooh books or show. The school is not gaining any money from this radio, if anything they are losing it by paying for all of the technologies needed for the radio.
Yes, this one seemed a stretch, but Sears owned the rights to Pooh. The school decided to find a different character to use for promotion - but seemed quite as fun as Pooh's News.
ReplyDelete