Found the perfect image on Google and added it to your presentation? Or inserted a piece of someone else’s article into your post because “everyone does it”? This is common mistake #1: assuming that everything on the internet automatically becomes public domain. By default, any use requires the author’s permission. But yes, there are exceptions. Many have heard of the flexible American “Fair Use” principle and think it allows almost anything. It is important to understand: Ukraine has its own, much stricter concept — free use of works. And they are not the same thing. Let’s break down where the fine line lies between legal use and theft.
Section 1. Free use in Ukraine: how does it work?
So, exceptions to the basic copyright rule of “you cannot take someone else’s work without permission” do exist. But in Ukrainian legislation, they work quite differently than many imagine after hearing about the flexible American “Fair Use” approach. Our system is much stricter, more formalized, and leaves no room for subjective interpretations of “fairness.” To legally exercise the right to free use, you need to clearly grasp two fundamental principles upon which it is built.
1.1. It is not a rule, but an exhaustive list of exceptions
The most important thing to remember: in Ukraine, there is no general “good faith principle” like in American Fair Use, where a court analyzes the situation in each specific case based on four flexible criteria (purpose, nature, amount, and effect of use). Our legislation works on a much stricter “whitelist” principle.
This means that the Law of Ukraine “On Copyright and Related Rights” (specifically, Articles 22-29) contains a clear and exhaustive list of specific cases where the use of a work without the author’s permission and without payment of remuneration is legal. And this list is closed. It is not a recommendation, but an exhaustive catalog of permissions.
How does it work in practice? It is not like a free discussion, but like passing customs control according to a strict list. You “declare” your purpose of use and check if it is on the list of permitted items. For example, you want to use a photo for commercial advertising. You look at the law and do not find the item “use in advertising” there. That’s it, your opportunities for free use end there. You need permission. But if you are writing a scientific dissertation and want to quote a paragraph from a book — such an item exists in the law.
Why is this important? Such an approach leaves no room for manipulation or subjective assessments. It may seem less flexible, but it is more predictable. You either clearly fall under one of the points of the law, or you don’t. No “buts,” “maybe,” or “well, it’s for a good cause” works here.
1.2. Three mandatory conditions for any free use
But even if your purpose is on the “whitelist” of the law (for example, you want to quote an article), this is absolutely not enough. This is just the first step that gives you the right to move forward. To make your use legal, you are obliged to simultaneously comply with three “golden rules” established by law. Ignoring even one of them automatically turns your seemingly legal use into ordinary piracy.
Here are these three inalienable conditions that are the foundation for any legal free use of works in Ukraine:
- Always indicate the author’s name. This is not just a sign of good manners, it is a direct requirement of the law, related to the author’s inalienable personal right to their name. If the original work indicates the author’s name or pseudonym (e.g., “Photographer Ivan Petrenko” or “Article by blogger @CreativeMind”), you are obliged to state it in the same form. Phrasing like “photo from the internet” is a direct violation.
- Always indicate the source of borrowing. You must clearly state where exactly you took the content from. This allows any interested person to find the original and check the context. The source can be the title of a book, website, magazine, or newspaper. For example: “Ivan Petrenko, from the site photobank.com.ua” or “Quote from the book ‘Fundamentals of Composition’, publishing house ‘Mystetstvo’.”
- Use only the amount justified by your purpose. This is the most important condition, which is often neglected. The law allows using not the entire work, but only the fragment that is objectively necessary to achieve your permitted purpose (quoting, creating a parody, illustrating news, etc.). You cannot copy 90% of someone else’s article, add one sentence of your own at the beginning, and call it a “quote for analysis.” It must be a fragment that illustrates your own thought, not replaces it.
Only the simultaneous fulfillment of these three conditions — author’s name, source, and justified amount — makes your use of someone else’s content fair in the eyes of Ukrainian law.
Section 2. When can you use content without permission
So, we have learned that free use is possible only in cases directly provided for by law and subject to compliance with the three “golden rules.” Now let’s look at the most common and useful exceptions from this “whitelist.” These are the situations where the law is on your side and allows you to use someone else’s creativity without obtaining separate permission.
2.1. Case 1: Proper quoting
This is probably the most famous and frequently used exception. Quoting is the use of excerpts from other people’s literary, scientific, or journalistic works in your own work. The main purpose of quoting is to confirm, analyze, or comment on your own statements using an authoritative source, or to enter into a discussion with the author of the quoted fragment.
What is important to know about quoting:
- Sources: you can only quote from lawfully published works. That is, you cannot quote a fragment from a book that someone stole from a publisher before its official release.
- Amount: this is a key point. The law does not set a clear limit in percentages or number of characters. The principle of “amount justified by the stated purpose” is used. If you are writing a scientific article, you can quote several paragraphs for deep analysis. If you are writing a blog post, one or two sentences are enough to illustrate your thought. Copying entire chapters under the guise of a quote is a violation.
- Form: a quote can be in the form of direct speech in quotation marks, or in the form of indirect speech (paraphrasing), but always with a reference to the author and source.
Example of proper quoting: in your blog, you write: “As the famous marketer Igor Mann notes in his book ‘Marketing by 100%’, ‘the main task of marketing is not to sell, but to ensure that the client returns again’. This thought perfectly illustrates the importance of customer service”. All conditions are met here.
2.2. Case 2: Education and science
The law makes significant concessions when it comes to educational and scientific purposes, as this promotes the dissemination of knowledge. Teachers, students, and scientists have more freedom in using other people’s works.
What is allowed:
- As illustrations in educational publications: it is allowed to use small excerpts from written works, photographs, and drawings in textbooks, manuals, and articles intended for learning. For example, a biology textbook can contain a photograph of an animal taken by a famous photographer.
- For use in the educational process: a teacher has the right to show students excerpts from films or play musical works during lectures if it is part of the curriculum.
- In scientific works: in dissertations, monographs, and scientific articles, the use of quotes, illustrations, and graphs from other scientific works is allowed for the purpose of analysis or research.
All this is allowed only for non-commercial educational and scientific purposes. If you create a paid online course by simply “grabbing” other people’s videos and photos, this will be commercial use and will require obtaining a license.
2.3. Case 3: Parodies, caricatures, and medleys
This exception protects freedom of creativity and satire. The law allows creating new works based on existing ones if they have a comic, parodic, or caricatural character.
- Parody and caricature: you can take a famous work (character, song, painting) and create a comic imitation of it. The purpose of a parody is to ridicule the original or some phenomenon using recognizable elements of the original. For example, creating a humorous sketch that parodies a famous movie.
- Medley: this is the creation of a new musical work by combining small fragments from other lawfully published songs. It is important that it is a new, holistic work, not just a collage of other people’s compositions.
The new work must be a creative reworking, not simple copying. It must have its own original concept. Creating “funny” memes with frames from movies often falls under this category.
2.4. Case 4: Use in news
This exception ensures the public’s right to information. Mass media have the right to use other people’s content to cover current events.
What this means:
- Coverage of events: it is allowed to reproduce in news public speeches, addresses, and statements by politicians that occur during current events.
- Photos and videos from the scene: if a photographer or cameraman took a shot during an important event (rally, sports match, official event), the media can publish this shot in their report, even without the author’s direct permission, but with mandatory attribution.
- Press reviews: it is allowed in special reviews to reproduce short excerpts from articles published in other newspapers and magazines.
This right applies specifically to the coverage of current events. A newspaper cannot simply take a beautiful landscape photo by a famous photographer and put it on the cover if that photo is not related to a specific news item.
Section 3. Common myths about free use
The topic of free use is shrouded in many myths and misconceptions. People often rely not on the norms of the law, but on their own sense of “fairness” or the phrase “everyone does it.” Such mistakes can lead to very real problems: from content removal to financial claims. Let’s break down the three most popular myths that need to be thrown out of your head once and for all.
3.1. Myth 1: “But I credited the author!”
This is probably the most common mistake. Many sincerely believe that it is enough to just sign the author’s name under someone else’s photo or text for the use to automatically become legal. Unfortunately, this is not so.
Why is this a myth? Indicating the author’s name is only one of three mandatory conditions for legal free use. By itself, it does not give you any rights. It’s like taking someone else’s car for a ride without permission, but leaving a note on the seat: “Took it for a ride, Ivan. P.S. The car belongs to Peter.” This does not make your action legal.
How to do it right? First, you must ensure that your purpose of use is included in the exhaustive list of exceptions (quoting, education, parody, etc.). And only after that, as a mandatory addition, you indicate the author’s name and source. If your purpose is not on this list (for example, you just want to decorate your commercial site with a beautiful photo), then no, even the most respectful mention of the author will make this use legal without their direct permission.
3.2. Myth 2: “It’s not for profit”
Another popular misconception: if I don’t make a direct profit from using someone else’s content, it means I’m not violating anything. A person runs a non-commercial blog about art history and fills it with images of paintings from famous museum websites, believing that “it’s for education, not for money.”
Why is this a myth? Ukrainian law, unlike American Fair Use, almost does not operate with the “commercial/non-commercial use” criterion as a primary one. The main thing is compliance with the purpose from the list of exceptions. Yes, there are certain concessions for educational purposes, but they are also clearly regulated. Simple non-commercial use in itself is not an excuse.
How to do it right? Your purpose must clearly fall under one of the categories described in Section 2. For example, if you run an art history blog, you can use images of paintings as illustrations in your critical or analytical articles (which falls under educational and informational purposes). But if you just created an online gallery by uploading hundreds of other people’s images without analysis or commentary, then even the non-commercial nature of your site will not save you from accusations of copyright infringement.
3.3. Myth 3: “I only took a small fragment”
This myth grows from a misunderstanding of the quoting principle. People think that you can take any small piece of someone else’s work for any purpose. For example, a designer takes a small but recognizable element from someone else’s illustration and inserts it into their commercial layout, justifying it by saying that “it’s not the whole work, just a part of it.”
Why is this a myth? Using a fragment (quoting) is allowed only for specific purposes defined by law: criticism, analysis, scientific research, etc. You cannot take a fragment of someone else’s song and insert it into your commercial soundtrack, calling it a “quote.” This would be creating a derivative work, which requires permission.
How to do it right? Always ask yourself: “Why am I taking this fragment?”. If the answer is: “To confirm my thought in an analytical article,” it is likely legal quoting. If the answer is: “To make my commercial product more beautiful/interesting/attractive,” then it is a violation.
Ignoring these rules is not just a theoretical mistake. It can lead to very real and unpleasant consequences. Even if you acted without malicious intent, the consequences of illegal use can range from a demand to remove content and a public apology to serious financial claims. To understand in more detail what threatens an infringer, we recommend reading our specialized article “Liability for copyright infringement“.
Conclusions
The topic of free use may seem complicated, but in reality, it boils down to one simple principle: respect for someone else’s work and a clear understanding of the boundaries of what is permitted.
- The main rule: if in doubt, ask for permission. This is the simplest and most reliable path to legal content use, which will save you from any potential risks and claims. Getting the author’s permission is always better than proving your case later.
- Free use is an exception, not a rule. Remember that this is not a “buffet” where you can take everything you like, but a narrow corridor of opportunities for specific purposes, clearly defined by law. Use it responsibly, always following the three golden rules: indicate the author, the source, and use a justified amount.
