A point of order about forum censorship

[sofarsogood]

A few days ago I posted a link and included the text to an essay written by government officials (Gottlieb and Zeller) acting in their official capacity. They were elaborating on their new intended approach to tobacco control. The entire thread was deleted due to alleged copyright violation (why not just delete the disputed text?). Gottlieb and Zeller's writing is certainly subject to the Freedom of Information Act so it should be freely available to reproduce. If I'm right about that please restore the thread.

 

[cats5365]

A few days ago I posted a link and included the text to an essay written by government officials (Gottlieb and Zeller) acting in their official capacity. They were elaborating on their new intended approach to tobacco control. The entire thread was deleted due to alleged copyright violation (why not just delete the disputed text?). Gottlieb and Zeller's writing is certainly subject to the Freedom of Information Act so it should be freely available to reproduce. If I'm right about that please restore the thread.

I'm not a mod, and don't play one on TV, but if I remember correctly, the essay was published in a medical journal and not on the government website.

The publication would have copy rights against the cut/paste of the whole article instead of the linking to their story. I think you could have copied a few lines, but would have had to link the user back to the original publisher for the whole story. It's a PITA, especially if something is behind a paywall, but thems teh rulez.

 

[retired1]

Moved to Site Feedback and Help

Just because something is available via FOIA or other means does not mean copyright law does not apply. You are welcome to quote a portion of the text under fair use (usually 10-15%, no more) and provide a link. Copying the entire piece and reposting it violates copyright law unless the article itself expressly states copyright laws do not apply.

Deleting a post that breaks the law is not censorship. It's ensuring ECF does not get into trouble when the copyright holder contacts us about copyright violations.

 

[CarolT]

"A work of the United States government, as defined by the United States copyright law, is 'a work prepared by an officer or employee' of the federal government 'as part of that person's official duties.'[1] In general, under section 105 of the Copyright Act,[2] such works are not entitled to domestic copyright protection under U.S. law and are therefore in the public domain."
Copyright status of work by the U.S. government - Wikipedia

 

[retired1]

Considering the piece did not come from a government site, the above does not apply.

I will also add that copyright issues are something that I'm extremely .... about. I've gone through this on another site and it's something that I will ruthlessly handle whenever I encounter it.

 

[CarolT]

Moved to Site Feedback and Help

Just because something is available via FOIA or other means does not mean copyright law does not apply. You are welcome to quote a portion of the text under fair use (usually 10-15%, no more) and provide a link. Copying the entire piece and reposting it violates copyright law unless the article itself expressly states copyright laws do not apply.

Deleting a post that breaks the law is not censorship. It's ensuring ECF does not get into trouble when the copyright holder contacts us about copyright violations.

The article itself does not have to expressly state that copyright laws do not apply. Regardless of what a journal says or doesn't say, if it's a US government work, it's in the public domain, and their claim of copyright protection does not exist.

 

[retired1]

Wrong. I will always side with the copyright statement on the site it comes from. I will not place ECF in jeopardy when it comes to copyright violations.

Closing.