This is certainly a case of 'be careful what you ask for'. Everything that is stated here about news articles is also true of graphics, all graphics, whether they are in avatars, or sigs, or a photo of an ecig used to clarify a discussion, or lolcatz, or hot actress pics. So make sure how much copyright policing you really want before you pound the table about it.
Content stealing much?
- Thread starter dc2k08
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
thats why my avatar is an edit and also makes no claims to it being anything but an image however if i was every contacted about not using it from the right holders i would comply asap
Ok here is a very good clarification for all to go by and its called Fair Use:
What is "fair use?"
The "fair use" provision of the copyright statute allows for the reproduction of parts of copyrighted materials without permission of the copyright owner "for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research." Fair use applies to ALL copyrighted works - books, Web pages, articles, artwork, music, etc.
As an example, the fair use provision protects you, as a student, when you make a photocopy of an article from a magazine for a paper you are writing. The copy you made is for research purposes; therefore, you do not need permission from the copyright owner.
How is "fair use" determined? In order to determine whether use of a copyrighted work is "fair," the following factors must be considered:
Websites:
What is "fair use?"
The "fair use" provision of the copyright statute allows for the reproduction of parts of copyrighted materials without permission of the copyright owner "for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research." Fair use applies to ALL copyrighted works - books, Web pages, articles, artwork, music, etc.
As an example, the fair use provision protects you, as a student, when you make a photocopy of an article from a magazine for a paper you are writing. The copy you made is for research purposes; therefore, you do not need permission from the copyright owner.
How is "fair use" determined? In order to determine whether use of a copyrighted work is "fair," the following factors must be considered:
- the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
- the nature of the copyrighted work;
- the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
- the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work (this is considered to be the most important factor).
You find a great picture of the Grand Canyon in a book. You scan it and put it in your PowerPoint presentation for geography class.
Fair Use. You would not need permission from the creator of the picture. (However, to avoid plagiarism, you do need to provide a reference to the book from which the picture came. When you incorporate someone else's work into yours - words into your writing, graphics into your presentations, etc. - it is extremely important to give credit where credit is due. )
You turn the text from your PowerPoint presentation into a magazine article and submit it along with the picture to National Geographic.
NOT Fair Use. You would need permission from the creator of the picture.
You left your textbook at home last weekend. You need to read chapter 2 for class tomorrow, so you borrow your friend's textbook and photocopy the chapter you need.
Fair Use. One chapter out a book is a small portion of the book. Plus, you did buy a copy of the book already.
The textbook for the class is only 50 pages, but it costs $25.00! You decided to photocopy your friend's entire textbook rather than buy it - it's a lot cheaper.
Below are some resources which will give you more information on fair use.NOT Fair Use. You are copying the entire book, not just a small portion, and the author/publisher of the book will lose money. You get a copy of the book without having paid the copyright owner for it.
Websites:
Fair Use of Copyrighted Materials
Fair Use of Copyrighted Materials
Fair Use of Copyrighted Materials
Fair Use
Fair Use
Copyright and Fair Use
Copyright and Fair Use
Fair Use Worksheet
UMD Library - Copyright Information - Fair use worksheet html format
Books:Fair Use
Copyright and Fair Use
Copyright and Fair Use
Fair Use Worksheet
UMD Library - Copyright Information - Fair use worksheet html format
Search URSUS by KEYWORD for copyright.
See What is "fair use?" if you need more info----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Sun[/FONT]
See What is "fair use?" if you need more info----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Sun[/FONT]
yes sun your posting is fact but here in lies the issue that i have seen SJ gets money from suppliers and members to help offset cost of running the site...so he makes money... all information posted here is there for implied that someone makes money for it...fair use would not apply someone lose ad revenue or even a sale or the like from having said information copied and cited. rather then a simple link and citation to the exact line of reference.
Lord, as much as i would like to agree, I can not concur, as your theory overreaches. Just as a University makes money and advertises and has advertises, it's students may write what they like. Just because the platform generates money is not the issue. It goes to the content of the post and if there is an infringment on the use ---The Fair Use Doctrine is applicable in this arena---Sun
I hang out at a political forum that has been sued by some media outlets and banned from posting any articles from other media sources. Links only are allowed by some media sources. It is a fully user funded site with donations to keep it afloat. No ad revenue, no profits.
I guess some forums are more equal than others.
I guess some forums are more equal than others.
Not a problem. One can quote excerpts, maybe a paragraph or two from an article for example, for the purpose of comment and discussion, and link back to the original for people to read the rest as the creator intended.
The problem is ripping off the entire creation, or the great bulk of it, by cut and paste so that you have essentially republished someone else's work. See the distinction? It is the difference between quoting enough of a part or parts so that people know what it is about and where to go to find the rest in context, versus just taking it. People can quote others words and discuss them, always have, the invention of the internet doesn't change that, just don't ripoff the whole freakin' thing, and remember to link or cite where you got the quote(s) from. It's not hard. Books and magazines and other publications and authors quote one another all the time, and charge their readers and sell ads while doing so. But regardless of their commercial status they don't lift entire works and pass the whole kit'n kaboodle around, and they also refer their readers to the source of the quotation for the complete context. It's really not that complicated and doesn't have to involve any tricky legal gray areas to do the right thing, and to effectively serve the interests of encouraging discussion and spreading information.
Good! If they were "posting [entire] articles" then I certainly would hope they got bent over and reamed big time. I can't begin to fathom the thought process that people use to imagine that is okay. What is so hard about simply quoting and/or describing what it is, and directing folks to the source where they can see the whole thing?
From the Las Vegas Review-Journal (4/13/09):
Bar owners, customers want less-complicated smoking law
Nevada Legislature considers changing law
...The law, as approved by voters in 2006, never specified how it would be enforced. Those regulations have yet to be written...
...The law, as approved by voters in 2006, never specified how it would be enforced. Those regulations have yet to be written...
<SNIP>
...The Legislature is considering changing the law altogether. Changes could include opening up some bars to smoking, reconfiguring how the law is enforced, and disallowing local jurisdictions to enact regulations that are tougher than the state law...
Complete article available at: Bar owners, customers want less-complicated smoking law - News - ReviewJournal.com
See? I just did it. Was that hard? Nope. Was that a possible infringement? Nope. Does it become infringement in the unlikely event this site's owner begins making kazillions of dollars from subscriptions or advertising? Not at all. If this site was run by an impoverished saintly monk living on roots and berries would that make it okay to cut the whole thing and paste it here? No way.
Last edited:
They were posting excerpts for the most part. The site is not allowed to even post excerpts under threat from the legal goons of some media organizations. There is now a database of banned sites that can not even be linked to.
AP Goes After Bloggers For Posting Article Headlines And Snippets AP Goes After Bloggers For Posting Article Headlines And Snippets | Techdirt
OK Ramblin, I must admit that has me scratching my head wondering what they (the AP) are thinking, and why. That is just strange. But the subhead on the "Techdirt" article is obviously right: "from the you're-going-to-lose,-badly dept."
AP is freaking out because few newspapers are willing to pay AP rates and cutting their subscriptions. AP needs some competition anyway. It's not a good thing to have one organization deciding what is news worthy.
Ramblin, if you should find yourself wanting or needing to bark back at those clowns in the AP legal dept. who obviously have been left unsupervised with too much time on their hands, here is a specialist in this field, named Clarke (Doug) Walton:
Walton Law Firm - Internet Law Services
He's not local to you (he is to me) but I know his work has extended nationally and internationally, as these things are not location specific, of course, and for what it's worth I do recommend him as an expert in these issues, as well as for his strong personal dedication to them and to civil liberties.
Walton Law Firm - Internet Law Services
He's not local to you (he is to me) but I know his work has extended nationally and internationally, as these things are not location specific, of course, and for what it's worth I do recommend him as an expert in these issues, as well as for his strong personal dedication to them and to civil liberties.
Last edited:
I think the AP is shooting themselves in both feet. They are creating what we need. Alternate sources of reporting the news. Citizens and amateurs reporting from on the scene, while not as trustworthy (let me think about that one) as trained journalists can offer news that otherwise would go unreported.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
