Course guidelines:

Every course produced by the trainer must comprise of 6 lessons. Each lesson must fulfil the minimum content requirement of:

1200 words

OR

A 10-minute video

A trainer may combine these two formats, however, the length of each when combined together will still need to fulfil the minimum content requirement i.e. a 5-minute video and a 600-word document would be acceptable

N.B. There is no maximum limit to the amount of content provided.

Video guidelines:

The video(s) must be shot in at least 720p, with 1080p or 4K being preferable.

Each video MUST be shot in landscape mode (if recording on a mobile device this is where the device is horizontal). Also the background of your videos should ideally be in soft focus and nature related. The other option is a plain white wall, with the trainer being far enough away from it, to not cast a shadow against it.

This page will be utilising Vimeo as its video service – please read and follow the compression guidelines stated here.

Copyright guidelines:

  1. Star Wars is a very valuable franchise and Lucasfilm/Disney are known to be highly
    effective in exploiting their UIP rights and highly aggressive in preventing others from
    doing so without consent. Great care should, therefore, be taken when navigating these
    legal waters. If in doubt, you should err on the side of caution.
  2. Many of the names associated with the Star Wars films are registered as trademarks and
    therefore if any of those names are applied to goods covered by the trade mark
    registrations, those registered trademark will be infringed.
  3. The Star Wars films themselves are copyright works, the rights of which belong to
    Lucasfilm/Disney. To the extent that anyone copies all or a substantial part of the film
    they will infringe copyright in the film.
  4. The scripts to the Star Wars films and the Star Wars books are copyright works (as literary
    works), the rights of which belong to Lucasfilm/Disney and possibly other
    authors/scriptwriters. To the extent that anyone copies all or a substantial part of the
    scripts or the text of the books they will infringe this literary copyright.
  5. The rights of a copyright owner are not absolute and the public (including publishers) are
    entitled to make certain narrowly defined uses of a copyrighted work without infringing the
    rights in those works.
  6. Copyright owners also have the right to object to any derogatory treatment of their work
    and this will apply to the Star Wars copyright works.
  7. You have certain rights to create a parody even if that parody infringes the copyright of
    the original work.

Registered trade marks

A registered trade mark is infringed if the mark is applied to goods or services that are identical
or similar to those covered by the registration. In some cases, where a mark is well known and
has a proven reputation its owner can prevent it from being applied to any goods or services.
However, a trade mark is only applied to goods where the mark is affixed to the goods or the
goods are sold under the marks. Therefore, with a book – the trade mark is not infringed if the
mark merely appears within the book.
What’s more, a registered trade mark is not infringed where it is used to identify the goods of the
trade mark owner (and where that use is honest and not designed to take unfair advantage of
the brand).
The following are some of the Lucasfilm trade mark registrations that cover books:
STAR WARS
JEDI
MAY THE FORCE BE WITH YOU
YODA, THE JEDI MASTER
THE FORCE AWAKENS
OBI-WAN KENOBI
LUKE SKYWALKER
REVENGE OF THE SITH
DEATH TROOPER
There are many others – this list is just intended to give you an idea of the scale of protection
that Lucasfilm/Disney has for the Star Wars trade marks.
Interestingly, THE FORCE on its own is registered as a trade mark for toys but not for books.

Rights in the film (rather than the script)

Here we look at the possibility of using still images from the Star Wars films within the book.
A key image of any of the iconic characters, scenes or locations from the films could easily be a
significant part of the whole film, particularly if you are using multiple images in the book. It is
not safe to assume that just because you are only using a split second from a 2-hour film it is not
substantial because the substantiality test has less to do with the quantity of the part taken,
and more to do with the quality of the part taken.
If we assume that any still image can be a substantial part of the film we must then ask if your
use of that image is permitted under the relevant legislation. There are two potential defences
available to you.
Fair dealing for the purposes of criticism or review
Fair dealing with a work for the purpose of criticism or review, of that or another work or of a
performance of a work, does not infringe any copyright in the work provided that it is
accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement. Whether or not you can you use this defence
depends on three factors:
1) Are you criticising or reviewing any works or performances?
2) ls the use “fair”?
3) Have you included a sufficient acknowledgement?
In practice, questions 1 and 2 are amalgamated in the sense that the Courts will often conclude
that if a use is unfair it cannot be a true criticism or a review.

The easiest way to consider questions 1 and 2 issue is to look at the leading case law.

  •  In the 1994 case of Time Warner Entertainments v Channel Four Televisions Channel 4
    broadcast clips from the till ‘A Clockwork Orange’ and the studio sued for copyright
    infringement. The court accepted the defendant’s argument that the documentary criticised
    the withdrawal of the film ‘A Clockwork Orange’ from distribution in the United Kingdom and
    this amounted to criticism of the film itself, since the content of the film and the decision to
    withdraw it were, on the facts, inseparable.
  •  In a case called Pro Sieben v Carlton? from 1998 the thirty-second clip from a German
    television documentary (the rights of which belonged to Pro Sieben) was shown in a Carlton
    television documentary. The German content was sensational tabloid fodder (a Max Clifford-
    brokered documentary about a woman pregnant with octuplets). In the lower court, the Judge
    focused on the motives of the defendant documentary maker and concluded that since they
    were commercial the use was not for criticism/review purposes nor was it fair. The Court of Appeal disagreed and focused more on the impact the defendant’s film would have on the viewing public. The public would see the defendants documentary as a criticism of works of chequebook journalism (which the claimant’s film embodied). The Court of Appeal also concluded that the relatively short clip would not impact on the commercial value of the claimant’s film and the defendant was not unfairly denying it a royalty. The defence was therefore allowed.
  • In a case called Fraser-Woodward v. sec from 2005, the Court found that the use of
    photographs of David and Victoria Beckham in a television documentary was fair on the
    basis that the documentary was about the way in which the Beckhams worked hand-in-glove
    with the media and the photographs were shown in order to criticise/review the obvious
    relationship between the photographer and the Beckhams.

These cases show that there must be a clear and necessary link between the image and the
criticism. In fact, with all of these cases, the images do not just illustrate the criticisms/reviews in
the documentary – they further the argument.
It is difficult to justify the use of a still from a film that depicts a character on the basis that you are
criticising/reviewing the words spoken by the character unless the still image does help to
further the argument.
Conceptually, it is possible to conceive circumstances where the use of a still image from the
films could be justified on the basis that you are criticising or reviewing the film. For example, if
your work portrays Yoda as an ascetic and discusses asceticism and abstinence as essential
principles of Jediism then an image taken from the film showing how humbly and simply Yoda
lived on Dagobah could be justified. However, these circumstances are narrow and great care
should be taken if you are relying on this defence to justify the use of a still image.

Fair dealing for the purposes of quotation

The second possible defence that could be relied upon to justify the use of a still image from the
film within the book is that you are using a quotation from a work. Whether or not you can you
use this defence depends on another three factors:
1) Is the extent of the quotation no more than is required by the specit7c purpose for which it is
used?
2) ls the use fair?
3) Have you included a sufficient acknowledgement?
This is a new defence and it has not yet been tested before the English Courts. However, EU
case law seems to indicate that quotations can extend beyond the use of text and cover the
use of photographs, in which case it would seem logical to assume that it might also extend to
cover the use of still images from a film.

It seems likely that questions 1 and 2 will be amalgamated by the Courts and answered in a way
consistent with the criticism and review case law mentioned above. In particular, since the
extent of the quotation must be no more than is required by the specific purpose for which it is
used, the Court is likely to focus on the context of the quote (image) and ask if its depiction is
necessary in order for the author to make his or her point.

In application, the new quotation defence is unlikely to provide a defence on our facts if the
criticism or review defence does not apply.

Alternatives to the use of images from the Wim?

In England and Wales, the original Star Wars costumes are not protected by either copyright or
design right. This was established after a series of high-profile Court cases that Lucasfilm lost”.
That means that if you can find original costumes (including replicas of Darth Vaders helmet and
the Yoda puppet) or the original 1970/80s toys, you can photograph those and use those
photographs in the book without infringing any copyright. Please note that this does not apply to
original photographs from the 1970/80s where the photographic copyright will continue to subsist.

Fair dealing defence for the use of images: Guidance

  • It is possible that the use of a still image from the film could be used in the book on the
    grounds of criticism, review or quotation but the circumstances are very narrow.
  • Any use of a still image from the film on the front or back of the book will be very difficult
    to justify on the grounds of criticism, review or quotation and should be avoided.
  • If the images are clearly intended to have a visual appeal independent from the content of
    the book or they have clearly been included in order to please a readership that likes to see
    Star Wars images, the use will not be fair and will be infringing.
  • The only circumstance where the use of a still image from the film could be used in the
    book on the grounds of criticism, review or quotation would be where the use of the image
    is either necessary or very persuasive in order to explain a point made alongside the
    image on the same page (see the Yoda/Dagobah example above).
  • Even if the use of an image is necessary/very persuasive, the defence will not apply if the
    court takes the view that you are unfairly competing with authorises publications.
    Therefore, any such use must be judicious and infrequent.
  • If you do feel confident in using an image from the film you must acknowledge the source
    of the image and the copyright owner. For example Scene from The Empire Strikes Back
    © Lucasfilm”.
  • As an alternative to the use of images from the film, consider creating your own
    photographs of costumes or toys from the 1970s/80s.

Are you criticising or reviewing any works or performances?
Rights in the script (as a literary work)
Here we look at the possibility of using quotes from the Star Wars films or books within your
book.
A key line from the films or books could easily be a significant part of the whole film/book,
particularly if you are using many of them in the book. It is not safe to assume that just because
you are only using a few lines from a 300-page book it is not substantial because the
substantiality test has less to do with the quantity of the part taken, and more to do with the
quality of the part taken.
If we assume that any line quoted from the films or books can be a substantial part of the
film/book we must then ask if your use of those lines is permitted under the relevant legislation.
As before when we considered the use of images from the film, there are two potential defences
available to you:
1. Fair dealing for the purposes of criticism or review, and
2. Fair dealing for the purposes of quotation.
However, for the reasons mentioned above, it is probably unhelpful to consider these as two
separate and unrelated defences/tests. Therefore, for the purpose of this note, I shall consider the
application of the two defences simultaneously.
Whether or not you can you rely on the fair dealing defences depends on a number of interlinking
factors.

  1. Are you criticising or reviewing any works or performances?
  2. Is the extent of the quotation no more than is required by the specific purpose for which it is used?
  3. Is the use ‘fair’?
  4. Have you included a sufficient acknowledgement?

There is another very helpful fair dealing case that is relevant here. In a case called Hubbard v.
Vosper from 1972 extracts from a book about L. Ron Hubbard was published in an
unauthorizes text that was critical of Scientology. Hubbard tried to argue that the fair dealing
section applied only to criticism of the work, not of the doctrine or philosophy underlying it. Lord
Denning rejected this argument and found that:
A literary work consists, not only of the literary style but also of the thoughts underlying it,
as expressed in the words. Under the defence of fair dealing both can be criticises.
This is helpful to us because it shows that there is a clear precedent for the publication of an
unauthorizes book that lifts quotes from another work in order to criticize and review the doctrine
or philosophy underlying it.
It should~ be much easier the justify the use of quotes from the Star Wars films and books in your
book than it is to justify the use of images because whilst it is rarely essential to use an image to                                    make a point about the philosophy of a character, it will often be essential to recite the words of
that character to make that point.
By way of comparison, could the teachings of Christ be criticised or reviewed without quoting
from the Gospels? I think that the answer to that question is no.
Quotes from other sources
It should be noted that the criticism/review defence is expressly drafted so that people (such as
publishers) may use an extract from work A in order to criticise Work B. The same fairness and
acknowledgement principles will apply but there is nothing to stop you (for example) from U§ing a
quote from Frank Herberts Dune alongside a quote from Star Wars in order to highlight
similarities in philosophy- °
Derogatory treatment
Alongside his or her copyright, the author of a text (or indeed a film or ima~ e) has the right to
object to any derogatory treatment of the work1°. Therefore, even if the use of a quote does not
amount to a breach of copyright it might still be unlawful if amounts to a derogatory treatment.
In practice, if a quote is used in a derogatory manner it probably won’t be fair and will tail to fulfil
the fair dealing test but it is certainly worth remembering that works must be affor~ a certain
degree of dignity when they are being used.
Parody
Notwithstanding your obligation not to treat in a derogatory fashion, you do have an express right to create caricatures, parodies or pastiches of copyright works. Any such parody must be ‘fair’ and recent EU case law indicates that a lawful parody must strike a fair balance between the interests of the rights holder and the public’s freedom of expression and therefore if the parody unfairly exposes the rights owner to censure it will not be lawful.

Fair dealing defence for the use of text: Guidance

  • Any use of a quote from the films or books on the front or back of the book will be more
    difficult to justify because the front/back of a book fumes a commercial and marketing
    function which might not be regarded asfair. The use of a quote on the front or back of
    the book should therefore be avoided.
  • Try to ensure that all quotes are used in context and for a clear purpose. Gratuitous
    quotes will be difficult to justify.
  • If the use (or the amount of use) of quotes is comparable to an officially licensed book the
    book will compete with officially licensed books so the use will not be fair dealing and will
    be infringing. Therefore, all use must be judicious.
  •  Since the extent of any quotation should be no more than is required by the specific
    purpose for which it is used, avoid the temptation to recite a long speech from the
    films/books if just a few words from it will suffice to make your point.
  •  There is nothing wrong in principle with emphasizing quotes (by placing them in boxes or
    by using a different size or style of font from other text). However, if you do this you need
    to be able to justify the emphasis. For example, you could use a quote in a box at the
    beginning of a chapter but if youdo so the chapter must refer back to the quote and there
    must be some logical rationale for its prominence/emphasis.
  • Avoid using quotes in a derogatory fashion and note that much greater care should be
    taken if a quote is used to make a controversial or offensive point. For example, if a quote
    is used to justify an argument that the character (or the author) wanted to make a
    controversial religious or political statement then you need to be able to justify this claim
    otherwise the use could beunfair.
  • Quotes need to be identifiable as quotes. If you lift text from the films (even where you
    take care to alter the words but retain the meaning) in order to pass off the words as your
    own — that will be an actionable plagiarism.
  • Where you use a quote from a film/book you must acknowledge the source of the image
    and the copyright owner. For example:Gbi-Wan Kenobi from The Empire Strikes Back ©
    Lucasfilm”. This need not appear alongside the quote on the same page so you could use
    footnotes or endnotes.

 

Copyright statements and obtaining permission for online content:

It is important to be aware that copyright owners do not have to make any statement at all to have copyright over whole web pages, text, images, graphic art, maps, videos, music, sound recordings or any other work, including artistic, dramatic, literary or musical – anything that is created and published on the Internet is automatically under copyright to the original creator under the law, assuming it has not itself been copied.

You cannot assume that the lack of a clear copyright statement either accompanying the individual item you want to use, or accompanying the whole site on which it appears, means the item can be copied freely. For that reason you should always seek the permission of the website owner, and check if they own the copyright to the item you wish to use or if they have been granted a licence to use the item by the original copyright owner. Any rights they have been granted or have purchased will be restricted to the usage on their site only; you must obtain the permission of the original rights owner yourself if you wish to copy it onto your own content. Many of them will allow some defined usage without asking for payment, but if payment is requested and you don’t think the expense can be justified, you must on no account go ahead and use the copyright holders’ content.

Acknowledging copyright ownership

Once permission is granted, terms of use agreed and any required payment has been made to the copyright owner, it is important to acknowledge the original owner of the image or work publicly on any site in which it used and not to pass it off as your own. If you have obtained formal permission to use an image under terms and conditions stipulated by the copyright owner, these may detail the precise credit line you should include with the image. For all other cases where you want to acknowledge copyright ownership, here are sample copyright captions for inclusion either with an individual image or on a page where you are using several images that require a credit line.

With individual image:

‘Photo courtesy of [photographer’s or company’s name, linking to their website or email address as appropriate]’

or

‘Credit: [photographer’s or company’s name, linking to their website or email address as appropriate]’

On a page where a number of images needing copyright acknowledgement appear:

‘Photography supplied courtesy of [list of photographers/company names, linking to their websites or email addresses]’

When using an image in the right hand ‘www Image with Caption’ template in Site Manager, the template includes an optional field for including a copyright acknowledgement.

If in doubt do not use it

You also cannot assume that an image you find on a website has not itself been copied illegally. For this reason, if, after contacting the website owner to obtain permission, you are not completely certain who owns the copyright on an image or other item, you should not use it.

 

If you have any issues regarding any of the above please use the contact form below:

Trainer Contact Form

    By checking this checkbox you agree with the storage and handling of your data by this website.
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

 

 

Privacy Policy Settings