Learn more about the copyright in study & research, such as:
Original authors’ works and subject matter other than works which are in a digital format enjoy copyright protection in the same manner as non-digital materials. In order to enjoy copyright protection, a work must be original and must exist in a material form. Under Section 16 of the Copyright Act, the reduction of a work into a material form includes the storage of the work in a computer and on any medium by electronic means.
In addition, under Section 13(1) of the Copyright Act, a literary work is defined to include a compilation in any form as well as a computer program. This definition of literary work is broad enough to include digital materials such as electronic databases, computer source codes, websites and blogs.
Any copyright which subsists in a compilation (such as a website), is in addition to and independent of any copyright in the underlying materials (such as the text, images and music on the website). For any copyright to subsist in a compilation, the selection or arrangement of its contents must be the product of intellectual creation.
Copyright owners have the same exclusive rights in relation to digital materials and materials in print form. The copyright owner’s exclusive right of reproduction extends to the making of a copy which is transient or incidental to some other use of the work.
While reproducing, publishing, and communicating copyright materials is made easier when the materials are in a digital format, the sharing of digital materials (for example, songs, photographs, or even the soft copies of readings for one of your modules) through Dropbox or Google Drive may infringe copyright unless one of the defences applies.
The ease of making copies of digital copyright works has made the effective enforcement of copyright in the digital realm much more difficult for copyright owners. As such, some copyright owners have turned to technological measures or digital rights management mechanisms to protect their works.
Common measures are copy control mechanisms (for example, locked PDF documents which prevent copying) and access control mechanisms (for example, encryption and passwords). The circumvention of these technological measures not only gives rise to civil liability, but may also amount to a criminal offence if done wilfully and for the purpose of obtaining a commercial advantage or private financial gain.
In general, the defences (such as the defence of fair use and the special defences for educational institutions) which apply to materials in print form also apply to digital materials.
The following are some defences which are specific to digital materials:
Fair use for digital materials
In general, where a literary, dramatic or musical work is stored on any medium by electronic means, and where the copying is for the specific purposes of research and study, copying within the following limits is allowed:
Making a back-up copy of a computer program
Under Section 237 of the Copyright Act, if you own a copy of a computer program (for example, Adobe Photoshop), the making of a reproduction of the program will not amount to an infringement of copyright if the reproduction is made for the purpose of only being used by yourself in lieu of your original copy in the event that your original copy is lost, destroyed or rendered unusable. However, this defence, is only applicable if the copy of the computer program that you own is an original one. If your copy was a counterfeit or unauthorised copy, you would not be able to make such a back-up copy without infringing the copyright in the computer program.
Filming or recording broadcasts or programmes for private, domestic use
Section 299 of the Copyright Act sets out a defence which allows the making of a cinematograph film or a sound recording of a television broadcast, sound broadcast or a cable programme so long as the film or recording is made for the private and domestic use of the person who makes the film or recording. The copyright in the broadcast or cable programme, together with the copyright in the underlying material (literary, dramatic, musical, artistic work, cinematograph film and sound recording) included in the broadcast or cable programme is not infringed.
Under Section 204 of the Copyright Act, you are allowed to make a copy of a work, recording, or performance is available on the internet for educational purposes (including for teaching and study) provided you fulfil the following conditions:
Copyright subsists in YouTube videos as a cinematograph film. Under Section 124, the owner of the copyright of a cinematograph film has the exclusive right to make a copy of the film, to cause the film to be seen in public and to communicate the film to the public.
The act of saving or downloading a YouTube video would amount to making a copy of the film and would typically amount to copyright infringement unless the copyright owner has consented to the downloading. However, Section 204 dictates that students and staff are allowed to reproduce videos on the Internet for educational purposes, so long as said videos are free for the public to access.
Likewise, showing YouTube videos in tutorials is considered an act of communicating a film to an audience without the express permission of the copyright owner, which would ordinarily constitute an infringement of the copyright of the film.
However, Section 205(5) allows for YouTube videos to be displayed for an audience, so long as the audience is limited to those who are taking part in the instruction or are otherwise directly connected to the institution where instruction is given.
You can use the quote if the amount of text copied is not a substantial amount and falls within the limits of a reasonable portion as described in Using Copyrighted Material. Copying in excess of this amount may amount to copyright infringement unless one of the fair use defences applies.
Do note, however, that copyright infringement is distinct from plagiarism. Students are advised to review NTU’s Academic Integrity Policy and to comply with the relevant acknowledgement/attribution requirements.
Yes, if the sketch is done for the purpose of education and done via a non-reprographic method such as drawing by hand. This also extends to sketches or drawings of buildings and sculptures. In any event, under Section 265 of the Copyright Act, the copyright in a building is not infringed by making a drawing of the building.
Before you start copying any work, it is safe to assume that most works are protected by copyright. Unless the amount copied constitutes a reasonable portion or falls within any of the fair use defences under the Copyright Act, there is always a risk of infringing copyright if a work is copied.
Generally, where the copying is for the specific purposes of research or study, it is likely to amount to a fair use as long as the portion copied is a reasonable one. What constitutes a reasonable portion is as follows:
Under Singapore’s Copyright Act, fair use refers to the permitted use of a work or protected performance to make a fair use of either. Whether the use of the work is considered “fair” is subject to Section 191, which uses 4 main non-exhaustive factors to determine if a potential copyright infringement can be considered as “fair use”:
(a) the purpose and character of the use, including whether the use is of a commercial nature or is for non‑profit educational purposes;
(b) the nature of the work or performance;
(c) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the whole work or performance; and
(d) the effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the work or performance.
Therefore, if reasonable attempts have been made to obtain a licence from the copyright owner to no avail, and the amount that was reproduced was not substantial, and was for non-profit educational purposes, the fair use defence is likely to apply.
Section 194 of the Copyright Act provides a defence for fair use for the purpose of research or study. The copying of a reasonable portion of a literary work for the purposes of research or study is considered a fair use.
Per Section 43, a ‘reasonable portion’ of a literary work is defined as:
Although the term “criticism or review” is not defined in the Copyright Act, this has been interpreted by the Courts to involve some element of evaluation or judgment on the merits of the work.
As such, it may be possible to rely on this specific fair use provision when using copyrighted material if the purpose of use of the work is for criticism or review.
For example, you may use a journal article in your assignment if you are critiquing or analysing that article. Do note, however, that in order to rely on this defence, you will need to make sufficient acknowledgment of the work (Section 192(2)). This means that you would have to identify the work by its title or other description and the author.
Here are some things to consider in general to see if your usage could fall under the general fair use defence.
Purpose
Nature
Amount
Effect on market
There are special exceptions for educational institutions which allow for the making of multiple copies or communication of literary and dramatic works, subject to certain specified limits.
Such multiple copying and communication may be carried out by any person (for example, a lecturer, administrative staff or student), but must be for the purposes of a course of education provided by the institution.
The specified limits under Section 197 are:
For physical works
For electronic works
Where a literary, dramatic or musical work is accompanied by an artistic work for the purpose of explaining or illustrating the article or other work, the defence in Section 197 is extended to such artistic works which accompany literary works for the purpose of explaining or illustrating the literary work.
Do note that no other part of the same work may be copied or communicated by or on behalf of the same person within 14 days of the first copying or communication.
If the total amount of work that the lecturer communicates exceeds the 5% limit, it may be possible to rely on Section 198 of the Copyright Act which provides for a statutory licence scheme which permits an educational institution to communicate copies of books and articles for the educational purposes of the institution. The amount which can be communicated is greater than that allowed under Section 197, but is subject to the right of the copyright owner to seek payment of equitable remuneration.
The specified limits under Section 198 are:
For literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works:
For articles within a periodical publication:
This limit can only be exceeded if after a reasonable investigation, it is discovered that new copies of the work cannot be obtained within a reasonable time at an ordinary commercial price.
First you will need to identify your requirements, for example:
Many academic publishers now use automated copyright clearance systems, such as RightsLink – which is used by Elsevier, Springer, Nature, and Wiley. Please see an example of using RightsLink here. If you need guidance on using RightsLink, please feel free to contact us.
Certain publishers also do have an official permission request template that you can either fill up online or download. For example:
Elsevier’s permission request form
Oxford University Press’s permission request form
Do plan ahead when making the permission requests as some publishers or people may take up to weeks or even months to reply. If you do not receive a response to your request, you should assume that permission to use the copyright work has been refused. In this regard, the use of the copyright work bears risks of copyright infringement unless a fair use defence clearly applies.
In any case, you should always maintain a record of all the permission requests you have made and their replies, so that you can produce them when required.
Citations and attributions are both means of giving credit to the creator of a work. However citations are generally a scholarly practice on referencing your sources of information, while attributions are typically a statutory or contractual requirement – for example, under the terms of a copyright licence such as a Creative Commons licence. Of course the author may also elect to waive his right to be attributed if he so decides.
It is also a moral right for the author of a work to not be falsely attributed as to the authorship of that work. Do note that attribution alone is not a valid defence to copyright infringement.
A typical attribution has 5 key elements: Title, author, source, licence, notes.
Take the example of a suggested Creative Commons attribution:
Calculus – The foundation of modern science by Eugene Khutoryansky licenced under CC BY on YouTube.
Under NTU’s Policy on Intellectual Property, the terms of which all students have accepted upon matriculation, the student will own the copyright to his thesis, subject to any other grants or agreements with external parties.
In addition, students should ensure they have obtained the necessary permissions from the various copyright owners whose works they have incorporated or referred to in their thesis.
Under the Policy on Intellectual Property, NTU is granted a royalty-free licence to use, publish, reproduce or distribute the thesis worldwide, in whole or in part and in whatever form, electronic or otherwise.
The NTU Open Access Mandate requires all NTU staff members to submit the digital full-text papers of journal articles and conference papers they have written and published to DR-NTU, the Institutional Repository of the University. NTU higher degree research theses from students would also be published on DR-NTU.
With reference to the NTU IP Policy:
‘A Student shall own the copyright in his or her thesis subject to any grant or agreement with external parties. The Student shall grant to the University a royalty-free permission to use, publish, reproduce or distribute the thesis worldwide, in whole or in part and in whatever form, electronic or otherwise.’
Therefore the student still retains the copyright to his/her thesis after submission.
You are advised to check the website Sherpa Romeo to ensure that the publisher of your article allows self-archiving of the paper in PDF. Sherpa Romeo is a site that lists publisher’s information on self-archiving rights. When in doubt or when information is not available, always submit the accepted version to DR-NTU.
During submission of your work to DR-NTU, you would be prompted to sign a distribution agreement for your work to be reproduced and distributed for free online access viewing by the public for educational, research and scientific non-profit use via the DR-NTU. Your consent once given is irrevocable.
If you have included material from other people’s work in your thesis or article, before it can be made available online to the world, you will need to obtain the copyright owner’s permission. Under Section 194 of the Copyright Act, there are provisions for "fair use for research or study" that may apply to your use of other’s copyright material in producing your thesis for examination purposes. However, these provisions do not apply to the University when it makes your thesis available to the world on the web.
If you are a higher degree student and wish to seek permission from the copyright owner to reuse copyrighted material in your thesis, you can contact us for suggestions on how to write a permission request to the copyright owner. Alternatively, you can view this page on requesting permission.
Upon submission of any work to DR-NTU, the submitter would need to declare that his/her work is original and does not contain any unauthorised third party copyrighted material.
You are expected to comply with University policies and guidelines namely, Appropriate Use of Information Resources Policy, IT Usage Policy and Social Media Policy. Users will be personally liable for any infringement of Copyright and Licensing laws. Unless otherwise stated, all guide content is licensed by CC BY-NC 4.0.