Copyright Do's and Don't's

Carl Shank • October 23, 2023

Copyright Do's & Don't's. "The Congress shall have Power ... To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Tımes to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." (U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8). Lawyer Sara Hawkins* notes that copyright laws are here to encourage the right of creation to authors, rather than to simply deny its use by other people. However, there is a delicate balance to be struck between the creator's rights and the public interest. How do we keep the rights of authors and yet let others use it?


Copyrights are granted to protect original works of authors, whether it be in literary, written, dramatic, artistic, musical or certain other types of works. Copyrights attach to something once it is created, by a snap of the camera, or the pen of an author, or the sound bites of a musical group. You do not have to file special paperwork for copyright rights, as is the case for trademarks and patents. Thus, by applying the copyright symbol (©) I have printed and published a number of books and typographic articles and fonts without any special paperwork from the government. The copyright owner can (1) reproduce the copyrighted work; (2) display and publish it publicly; and (3) prepare derivative works based on the copyrighted work.


Copyrights do not apply to works in the public domain, words, names, slogans or short phrases (those may have protection in trademark law); blank forms; works that are not original; and government works. Ideas, procedures, processes, systems, method of operation, concepts, principles or discoveries are not copyrightable. Thus, the ALPHABET, for example, is not copyrightable. "The copyright in an architectural work that has been constructed does not include the right to prevent the making, distributing, or public display of pictures, paintings, photographs, or other pictorial representations of the work, if the building in which the work is embodied is located in or ordinarily visible from a public place."(Section 120a) In other words, pictorial representations are permitted of copyrighted works, if the work is located in a public place where everyone and anyone can see it. I have a photo of a bronze statue of Ben Franklin and the printing press, which is located on the grounds of the Masonic Village in Elizabethtown, PA. That photo is allowed under copyright laws.


Copyrights are long-lasting — "Copyright in a work created on or after January 1, 1978, subsists from its creation and, except as provided by the following subsections, endures for a term consisting of the life of the author and 70 years after the author’s death." (Section 302a) Also, "In the case of an anonymous work, a pseudonymous work, or a work made for hire, the copyright endures for a term of 95 years from the year of its first publication, or a term of 120 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first."  Copying of a work includes printing, photocopying and similar methods of mechanical duplication. It is not permissible to reproduce copyrighted materials without the written authorization of the copyright holder unless it qualifies under the copyright law's doctrine of "fair use."


How do I legally use a copyrighted work? There are two ways currently available — Get written permission from the creator for its use, or use it perhaps under what is called the "Fair Use" doctrine. Sara Hawkins again says, "The purpose of the Fair Use Doctrine is to allow for limited and reasonable uses as long as the use does not interfere with owners' rights or impede their right to do with the work as they wish." Fair Use is found in USC Section 107 of the Copyright Laws. It depends on four factors — (1) The purpose of use of the copyrighted material. Fair use of copyrighted works, as stated in US copyright law, “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.” If you are doing a research paper, for instance, you are allowed to quote a copyrighted source, for comment or critique without permission from the original copyright holder. The rules of etiquette require usually footnoting such use. Also, this does not mean, however, that all nonprofit education and noncommercial uses are fair and all commercial uses are not fair; instead, courts will balance the purpose and character of the use against the other factors below. 


(2) The second test in "Fair Use" cases concerns the nature of the copyrighted work. Using a more creative or imaginative work (novel, music, movie) would probably not support a Fair Use claim, than a use of a more technical article or a news item. Also, "transformative" uses that adapt the work to something that is decidedly new, with a further purpose or different character, and do not substitute for the original use of the work, can fall under the Fair Use doctrine.


(3) The third test is the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole. If the amount borrowed or used is relatively small in relation to the whole work, this favors a Fair Use finding by the courts. But if the portion used is at the "heart" of a work, this factor will likely weigh against a finding of fair use even if that portion was otherwise a very small amount.


(4) The fourth test for Fair Use is the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.  So, as Matthew Goings notes: "An unofficial Seinfeld trivia game would not be not fair use because it could or would affect an official game even though none existed." (https://copyrightalliance.org/faqs/what-is-fair-use/) He says that "Courts evaluate fair use claims on a case-bycase basis, and the outcome of any given case depends on a fact-specific inquiry. This means that there is no formula to ensure that a predetermined percentage or amount of a work—or specific number of words, lines, pages, copies—may be used without permission."


What about AI generated materials and copyright laws? Talk about a thorny issue. Right now, in the courts, there are lawsuits pending against big time AI players such as GitHub and Microsoft and Open AI seeking to see whether or not AI created materials are subject to copyright violations and piracy on a level not seen since the Napster violations in the 1990s. Getty Images have filed a suit against Stable Diffusion, an  AI art developing tool, claiming that its images are too close to the real thing and thus violate copyright laws. This is far from "Fair Use" standards. The Clarkson Law Firm has two class action suits against OpenAI and Google claiming that AI "stole" copyrighted materials from their creators.** Moreover, the U.S. Copyright office has ruled that AI cannot be considered an "author," since only a person can be an author.


Additionally, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/) has filed with the commission investigating AI and copyrights. They do not support any additional laws specifically targeting AI. They write — "Our high level view is that copyright law has been adapting to disruptive technologies since its earliest days and our existing copyright law is adequate to meet the disruptions of today. In particular, copyright’s flexible fair use provision deals well with the fact-specific nature of new technologies, and has already addressed earlier innovations in machine learning and text-and-data mining. So while Generative AI presents a host of policy challenges that may prompt different kinds of legislative reform, we do not see that new copyright laws are needed to respond to Generative AI today."



At present, this is an open-ended issue, and the courts and Congress will have to argue it out. Suffice it to say at this juncture, that using AI to re-create an illustration or an entire book may involve copyright breaches. Be careful in using the technology to bypass coded laws.


What does all of this mean for the typographer or printer or publisher? I would suggest several avenues of using copyrighted materials.

  1. Seek permission for its use. This is always the best and most honorable course of action. You may have to contact the publisher, who then in turn may contact the writer. I did this for a study guide I wrote on a book from Oxford Press in England on the life and work of Jonathan Edwards, the great early American theologian in New England. While it was only a study guide with excerpts on which to comment, and for church study and use exclusively, the Press required a contractural engagement that lasted for one year with a limited number of copies that could be printed and made available, even for religious study and use. It would have cost me $500 for twelve copies for a year. I declined and went another route with some of the material.
  2. Use legitimate free sources for photos and images. I use dreamstime.com in their free portfolios for the background photos and images for a number of book covers I have crafted. There are other legitimate sources in iStock, for instance. Licensing uses and rules apply to most of these freebies. And give credit for where credit is due, even for the freebies.
  3. Use your own work and photos. I know this requires substantial time and effort, but it is usually the right thing to do. I put together a historical calendar of the Lancaster PA area using photos I personally took.
  4. Use the old "buyer beware" adage here. Are you willing to risk your site being taken down, or getting a cease and desist letter, a bill or actually being sued through the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which can be very, very costly. People actually make a living on book royalties and selling or licensing their work. Poaching their work for pleasure or profit is unacceptable.


(I would also recommend a lawyer firm with which I have worked in the Lancaster, PA area. Please note this article from them at https://gkh.com/protecting-copyrights-vs-protecting-trademarks/)


(*Sara Hawkins, Copyright Fair Use and How It Works for Online Images, https://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/copyright-fair-use-and-how-it-works-for-online-images/)

(**Lucie Růžičková, Ai and Copyright: The Legal Landscape, https://blog.apify.com/ai-copyright/#:~:text=In%20general%2C%20the%20answer%20to%20%22Can%20AI-generated%20content,only%20a%20person%20can%20be%20considered%20an%20author.)



Successful Layout & Design

King James Bible Typography

By Carl Shank • April 7, 2026
The King James Bible (KJV), commissioned by King James 1 in 1604 and published in 1611, has been a profound Bible translation and masterpiece of beauty through the ages. It has been one of the most influential English translations of the Bible. Its history combines politics, religion, and literary achievement in early modern England. It has an elevated, poetic style that influenced many later writers. It has been prized for its literary beauty, historical continuity and memorability in public reading and worship (ChatGPT).

Responding to AI and Digital Babylon

By Carl Shank • April 6, 2026
Responding to AI and Digital Babylon H. Carl Shank April 4, 2026 Austin Gravley, a former Social Media Manager of The Gospel Coalition, and now the Director of Youth Ministry at Redeemer Christian Church in Amarillo, TX, is writing a book on AI and the digital revolution taking place. He compares this Digital Babylon and its captivity and its exiles to Christians living under the overwhelming influence of an active anti-Christian developing AI. Piecing together his comments with those of many others on the advancing scene of AI on our lives, several themes come to mind. First, AI is not God. While there are some in the Silicon Valley who might wish or see AI as a unifying, ontological force that can shape or rule our lives — the Super Machine —others remind us that this is only technology. And as advanced as AI is and becomes, God is still sovereignly in control of it and our lives. Jason Thacker, professor of philosophy and ethics at Southern Seminary and Boyce College, writes — “We must engage these issues, rather than respond after their effects are widely felt. But we don’t have to face today or tomorrow with fear. God is sovereign and his Word is sufficient for every good work, so we are able to walk with confidence as we apply his Word to these challenges with wisdom and guided by his Spirit.” ( The Age of AI: Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Humanity , Zondervan, 2020) A recent storm that darkened my community and scuttled Internet services reminded me of that. Even AI data centers, growing to over 3,000 in 2025 nationwide, are not immune to power disruptions and total blackouts. AI pundits may claim to have control procedures to keep the Internet and AI running cannot promise it to be so. We need to keep this in mind in the Digital Babylon age, as was needed to be kept in mind by Israel in the Babylonian Empire age in biblical times. Babylon went through many iterations, but will be defeated by God at the end of the day, as noted in Revelation. Digital Babylon will experience the same demise. This is not prediction, just Bible truth. We as believers need to hold on to such truth. Second, AI is still technology. Indeed, advanced and advancing technology, but not human. Matthew Schultz in a recent mereorthodoxy.com article notes— “Technology has existed since the Garden and is an integral component of our cultural mandate. We should also remember that one of the core distinctions between the Creator and his creatures is that we never create matter but merely (!) rearrange it. This becomes clear whether we consider an ancient farmer in Mesopotamia irrigating a plot of soil, a medieval peasant in Northumbria weaving a basket from flax, or a young musician in London taking the raw outputs of machine sound, adjusting its pitch, volume, and length, and incorporating it into a DAW loop. While there are all sorts of important distinctions and qualifications between pre- and post-industrial craft, there is no metaphysical distance between the two.” ( Artificial Intelligence Is A Technology , Feb. 26, 2026). AI may be the harbinger of a new Industrial Age, but though changes will be major and sometimes severe, the human side of the equation cannot be discounted or counted out. Part of my retired status as a pastor and theologian is that of a typographer restoring old type faces and doing a deep dive into the history of type. Two historical typographical truths stand out. Although the Renaissance age brought movable type from Gutenberg and others into the machine age, the typographical flair of those ancient scribes with pen-drawn exquisite type remained a stylistic standard. The second note is that with the Industrial Age, while affecting the quantity and speed of type development and printing, master type craftsmen rebelled against machine driven type for more organic typefaces. This was seen, for instance, in the type movement spawned by William Morris (1834–1896). William Morris was an Arts & Crafts designer who founded the Kelmscott Press (1891), reviving hand craftsmanship in printing. His work influenced the twentieth century private press and type revival movements. Lettering became a vehicle for breaking convention. Led by figures such as Morris, there was a decided reaction against industrialization, seeing machine-made goods as dehumanizing and ugly. Handcraftmanship, honesty in materials and utility fused with beauty made up much of what was called the Arts & Crafts Movement. That movement was rooted in medieval guild ideals and morality in design. (For an expanded history of type development, see “Advances in Typography: A Historical Sketch — Three Parts” in the blogs by CARE Typography, www.caretypography.com , Nov. 8, 2025, Nov. 18, 2025 and Nov. 20, 2025) Third, AI affects everyone everywhere. Austin Gravely, a former Social Media Manager of The Gospel Coalition, raises and answers the query — “’So what?’, you may think. ‘I’m not an Internet technician. I’m not a fan of AI. I’m not planning to change how I use the Internet. Why does any of this matter to me?’ To put it bluntly: you are naive if you think these disruptions won’t directly affect you, or indirectly affect you through the effect they will have on others. If the iPhone, social media, and AI have taught us anything, it is that you are impacted by these events regardless of whether you participate in them or not.” ( The State of the Internet: 2026 , mereorthodoxy.com, March 30, 2026) He goes on to say — “A changing Internet will change you. It will change you in ways you can see and in ways you can’t. It will change those you live with, work with, play with, build with, and fight with. It will change what is possible, probable, permissible, and prohibited in your life, your vocation, your church, your neighborhood, and any other physical space the Internet touches.” I recall my 99 year old mother who passed away a couple of years ago in a nursing facility. She was one of those survivors of the Great Depression and World War Two who dismissed the first moon landing and had her flat screen TV removed from her room for fear the government was watching. She lasted for nine years in the same private room in a modern nursing center. She was attended by doctors and nurses and staff who used AI on their computers and other care devices. She even had a modern digital phone removed from her room and refused to learn it. While she personally rebelled against her AI driven machine age, she could not escape those who used such technology for her care. We cannot isolate ourselves from AI and its advancing development, no matter how isolated we try to be. Fourth, AI can be either a blessing or a curse. Again, Matthew Schultz notes — “Our task is not to develop a unique theology of AI but to catechize our members into a people who can wield this technology without becoming captive to its internal logic. Like alcohol, artificial intelligence will become a test of character, a dangerous good that divides the foolish from the wise.” He says “Yet the greatest danger is both more pervasive and less obvious: AI is much more likely to be deployed as a multiplicative layer that allows ever more efficient micro-targeting of digital services and physical products by industries that already profit from compulsive behavior. The advent of hyper-personalized, real-time engagement strategies will require legislative safeguards, especially if AI leads to video advertisements generated in real time for an exhaustively mapped individual profile.” We must seek to “humanize” AI and employ it “humanly.” We must resist the phenomenological bent toward unbelief in AI development and pressures. We must once again learn to think critically and pervasively and biblically about AI. Our young people must be taught prescriptive critical thinking practices, rather than unwittingly and ignorantly giving in to what their phones and computers spit out. Church and ministry pastors must pastor rather than let AI bots plan, prepare and even give their sermons. We must learn to smartly negotiate with the “Magnificent Seven”— Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, Nvidia and Tesla — rather than blindly following their lead. Convenience and speed must not be allowed to overtake and overcome careful, sustained and critical thinking and acting. “To give language to this change, we must take the best of Christian thinking regarding the social and political imaginary and apply it to the economic imaginary of life under the glowing shores of Digital Babylon, and that kind of work cannot be done with quick hot takes. It will take slow, deep, and thoughtful meditation to apply the riches of Christian thought to making sense of the companies that got us here and where they are taking us.” (Austin Gravley, The State of The Internet: 2026 ) I am both excited and wary of AI. I have learned to be much more cautious about social media and the videos and photos and information they give. Much of it has been and is being AI produced and tweaked. Spammers use AI technology to wrest thousands of dollars from unsuspecting senior citizens. Schools are requiring students to turn off their cell phones or “bag” them until after school hours because of the insidious nature of AI generated stuff. I value more and more of a face-to-face approach in teaching and learning and mentoring others. And we must adopt a state of “believing is seeing” rather than a non-Christian scientifically sanctioned “seeing is believing” approach to truth and justice.
Show More