The correct answer would depend on the specific details of how John and his group has recreated the case regarding animal protection law. However, we can evaluate the given options:
-
Yes, because it is fair use. - This could potentially apply if they are using limited excerpts for educational purposes and providing commentary or analysis.
-
Yes, because the information is part of the public domain. - If the case or the information they are using is indeed from a public domain source, then this would be allowed. However, many legal cases may not be in the public domain depending on the jurisdiction.
-
No, because copyright law prevents it. - This is plausible if they are reproducing substantial parts of copyrighted text without permission or not in a way that falls under fair use.
-
No, because it’s plagiarism. - If they are using someone else's work without proper attribution, this is true and would be considered a serious academic offense.
In summary, if John and his group are properly citing sources and using the information for educational purposes within the fair use provisions, then it could be allowed. However, if they are using copyrighted material without permission or not attributing it properly, it may violate copyright law and rules against plagiarism.