Legalities of copying and pasting from other sources on the internet - pls discuss

[Memnoch]

I've PMd you by the way.

[Violet]

Here is another link:
http://whatiscopyright.org/

[Dace De'Briago]

Well, as far as I'm concerned as long as individuals exercise common sense and only post relevant segments of material (rather than proving they know how to copy and paste entire articles like some spasmodic spam master) I don't see anything wrong with it.

The use of supporting material does help us (particularly in this forum) get a consensus on opinions about different subjects and provide evidence to support our arguements.

Most of the guys on this forum actually source articles as well (generally only posting a small 'taster'), acknowledging the author of an article is simple common courtesy.

All said, leave things the way they are, but discourage out and out copying.

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by Violet: Here is another link: http://whatiscopyright.org/

From the link:

None of this information may be duplicated verbatim on another web site, even for educational purposes. None of it, even if I am credited.

Oh, yes it can. And I'll do it just to spite the author. The author fairly described the fair use doctrine, and even gave the example of the National Geographic picture, with a citation, used as a reference for comment -- to wit:

Scanning a photo of the Amazon Forest printed in National Geographic and using it without permission on your personal web site about your family trip to South America will most likely not be considered as fair use. However, if you republished the photo on your site to comment on the photo as it was published in National Geographic, this would most likely be considered fair use.

Same thing here in this post of mine. So, have a big raspberry. [img]tongue.gif[/img] And, by the way, shame shame on the author for correctly summarizing the law and then telling you it doesn't apply to him.

[ 03-15-2005, 05:23 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

[Davros]

LOL - that just makes me want to post the following [img]smile.gif[/img]

Pull: 'CLICK' WHUMP!

[Violet]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: quote: Originally posted by Violet: Here is another link: http://whatiscopyright.org/

From the link:

None of this information may be duplicated verbatim on another web site, even for educational purposes. None of it, even if I am credited.

Oh, yes it can. And I'll do it just to spite the author. The author fairly described the fair use doctrine, and even gave the example of the National Geographic picture, with a citation, used as a reference for comment -- to wit:

Scanning a photo of the Amazon Forest printed in National Geographic and using it without permission on your personal web site about your family trip to South America will most likely not be considered as fair use. However, if you republished the photo on your site to comment on the photo as it was published in National Geographic, this would most likely be considered fair use.

Same thing here in this post of mine. So, have a big raspberry. [img]tongue.gif[/img] And, by the way, shame shame on the author for correctly summarizing the law and then telling you it doesn't apply to him. [/QUOTE]He does give permission, just under strict conditions, which by copyright laws and as the author he has a right to.
Yes?
That's my understanding of it anyway.

To quote completely (without editing) for clarification of the discussion regarding use of the author's material:

Use of the information at this site. Do you want to copy or use this information, whether offline or online? Do you want to write your own copyright page or something similar? Do you want to link here? Do you still have copyright questions? Creating similar pages. None of the contents of this web site - whether it be text, HTML or graphic images - may be mirrored, reproduced, or displayed in whole or in part on another web page or web site (whatever the nature or purpose) or in any publication or collection of widespread circulation, whether offline or online (whatever the nature or purpose). If you would like to write your own copyright disclaimer, copyright page or anything similar and you use my information as a source to write it you must reference me as such somewhere on your document with a link to http://www.whatiscopyright.org - even if you consider it "fair use" (read the above paragraph regarding "fair use") and even if my words are paraphrased (yes, that is a part of my copyright). Translations of this page into other languages are not authorized (yes, that is also a part of my copyright) as I am unable to review the translation and verify its compliance with this document and corresponding legislation. However, brief summaries of this document into other languages are permitted provided i) any such summary does not exceed 1,500 characters in length, ii) a link to http://www.whatiscopyright.org is included on the same page the summary published (a link only, do not copy and publish this page at the location of the summary!), and iii) a disclaimer stating that the summary may not be true to the actual language of the document at http://www.whatiscopyright.org is included at the foot of the summary in question. Due to the legal nature of this document, all three of these conditions must be fulfilled. Use for educational purposes. Any or all of the text at http://www.whatiscopyright.org may be reproduced in a printed document for educational, non-profit purposes, but credit must be given to me by referencing this website by URL (http://www.whatiscopyright.org) on the same document this information is reproduced so that everyone knows from where it came, and that none of my text be modified or altered in any way. If you would like to add your own comments you may do so - just include them in parenthesis with a note that establishes that the comments are not mine. This is limited to printed documents of an educational nature only, with no lucrative purpose. This information may not be distributed on a cd or hard disk, or reproduced on another web page, whatever the nature or purpose. *None of this information may be duplicated verbatim on another web site, even for educational purposes. None of it, even if I am credited. I will find it eventually, and publishing it without my permission is a violation of my own copyright, which defeats the purpose of this page. Like this text? Link to it. Don't steal it. Linking to this site. If you'd like to link to http://www.whatiscopyright.org so that others may learn of copyrights you are welcome to do so, but please do not place your link in such a manner as to mislead others to believe that this page is a part of your web site, or as an "exit door" from your site without your visitors knowing where they are going. People have done this in the past and it causes such visitors to think that I am the owner of your site, or viceversa. Additionally, spamming guestbooks, mailing lists or anything similar with this URL is also prohibited. Do you have copyright questions? If you still have copyright questions or issues that need resolving, this is not an all-inclusive legal opinion. This is a non-profit web site that contains basic and general copyright information provided for educational purposes only. Although I am an attorney I do not specialize in copyright issues and I do not answer copyright questions on an individual basis, debate or provide free legal advice. If you are interested in contracting my services as an attorney, I appreciate your interest but I am unavailable to freelance or offer my services. If you have further questions regarding copyrights please visit the resources listed above, or retain your own lawyer. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This page is written, maintained and owned by a licensed attorney with a specialization in financial tax law. Although I have researched and consulted with fellow attorneys to draft this opinion, I do not purport to be an expert on intellectual property legislation. It is also important to establish that this is NOT a U.S. based site. It does not refer to the laws of any country in particular. The source of the information provided at WhatisCopyright.org is the Berne Convention in order that any individual or company who resides in a country that has signed the Berne Convention may benefit from this text. Copyright laws from country to country may vary but never contravene or provide less copyright protection than the Berne Convention. With the exception of the "Business Network Services" logo, all text and images contained herein are owned by and are copyright © 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 WhatisCopyright.org. None of the contents of this site may be reproduced or republished except as noted in my terms and conditions for use.

Mods, feel free to edit this post if you feel it violates copyright laws.

[ 03-15-2005, 07:15 PM: Message edited by: Violet ]

[Cloudbringer]

Well, I'd take some of what he says with a grain of salt, as he does point out he's not a specialist in copyright and his info is not US based which, of course the IW server is.

I'd always thought your summary was fairly close to the way it should be, Mems. But then I'm no expert either.

[Memnoch]

Originally posted by Larry_OHF: quote: Originally posted by Memnoch: However I've recently heard legal advice which suggests otherwise - that ANY posting of articles and images, no matter where from or how little you copy and paste, leaves the message board open to being sued for copyright breach. I didn't realise the law was this stringent, particularly with respect to images (which we all copy and paste).

Freaking crap!! If we are doing something that could even possibly get Ziroc sued and IW shut down, then it would be my feeling to not even take the chance and live life safely. It would not be me getting into trouble, it would be Ziroc losing money over allowing this forum to operate with posted illegal material. I would not want to do that to him, nor would I want to lose IW for myself. But if this newfound idea is bogus, and cannot be upheld then I see no problem with posting material as long as it is cited or referenced.

Another thing. Since you said here that locking a thread that has cited material would be a bad thing, maybe the next time I see a thread from somebody that does not give credit where its due will need to be edited to remove the uncited work.

We need TLs input on this, certainly, as well as Ziroc's.

I hope we can resolve these issues soon. [/QUOTE]I think this is an extreme case, Larry. Don't jump to any conclusions at this point. It comes down to managing risk - I'd say the chances of actually getting sued for breach of copyright for articles that are copied for the purposes of discussion and critique is quite low, under the concept of fair use. And if the original author was to take offence, most likely they'd request the offending article be deleted before initiating legal action, which of course costs money. I think they'd have higher priorities than suing some message board. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Timber Loftis]

He does give permission, just under strict conditions, which by copyright laws and as the author he has a right to. Yes?

Erm... in a word, no. It is my understanding that the author does not have the right to limit the fair use doctrine. Otherwise, every site on the internet would post rules regarding fair use.


Mems notes that it comes down to managing risk, which is low for some message board. This has merit. No matter whether or not someone has a viable claim, the question is always "what are the damages?" Well, here it would be hard to cite any damages. Additionally, regarding the whole "management of risk" issue, remember that all risk is comprised of 2 variables -- (1) likelihood of the detrimental event occuring and (2) the magnitude of said event. Both are likely low here on our favorite brown board.

No one, that I've seen, posts or links quotes for monetary gain, and it's most always for informational purposes. That, of course, means any legally valid suit against TL for posting wholecloth NYTimes articles (for example) would lose out in the economic analysis -- i.e., they'd be suing me for WHAT? Regarding the NYTimes in particular, they surely benefit more from my extolling their virtues than they lose in the way of FREE subscriptions to their website.

As I stated, though, I am willing to post in the fashion I do because I feel I am competent to handle any complaints. I feel certain that I can make litigating against me enough of a pain in the arse for it to NOT be worthwhile for any claimant.

[Luvian]

In my opinion, as long as the other site doesn't charce for the info you're posting, and as long as you provide a link to the source, then that's free advertisement.

If the info was pais for, like a news site that charge to read it's arcticle, then I see it as illegal, but don't care either because I think information of that kind should be free. It's not like the guy made the news, he's just reported what happened. Is he giving a part of his profit to the person he's reporting about?