|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
OP
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
Have we evolved a "house rule" on how we deal with quotes?
From time to time it is interesting to pick up information from other sites. I've tried it various ways:
(i) A pure link - This is fine but some people don't want to follow them (or like many of us, don't have much time) so lose the point. It also means that over time, the link may not work and the information is lost.
(ii) A (short) quote in ""'s (inverted commas, quote marks or whatever) followed by a link which
a) acknowledges the quote and
b) allows those who want to know more to find out for themselves
I wonder if any of our lawyers (or legally minded contributors) are aware of the copyright issues involved.
Any views?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
Dear jmh: I have wondered about this. I does seem likely that copying and inserting quotes might be illegal. It would be nice to know, and I think we owe it to Anu not to be in violation. wwh
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,439
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,439 |
From my newspaper days : quotes are OK as long as credit is given to original author and/or publication and only a short quote used as a "review" or similar.
I now await The Word from the worker bees who are having a day off ...
wow
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
assuming that nothing posted here is of a commercial nature, the key concept is "fair use". here is the statutory language about fair use found in Section 107 of the Copyright Act: Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use, the factors to be considered shall include-- 1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; 2) the nature of the copyrighted work; 3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and 4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copy righted work.so there is the (excerpted) legalese. here is something I copped from somewhere: When you are about to make a copy, a strident annoying bell should go off in your head. You should heed this as a warning that you need to think clearly and objectively about what you are about to copy. Put yourself in the place of the person whose work you want to copy; how would she feel about what you want to do? [emphasis added] http://www.efuse.com/Plan/copyright2.html
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094 |
Section 107 of the Copyright Act
But we're dealing with international copywrite laws on the internet. That doesn't seem to deal with either international standards or the internet.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
Tsuwm, I noticed your irony: you used both a partial quote, which you reffed by saying it was something I copped from somewhere, and gave a link as well. And this is one I took the time to go to, because it was my use of a copyrighted quote that sparked off this discussion. (I will say in my defense that I am aware that there is no significant difference in copying something to here and in printing it: I just put that so I could use my secret word.)
This is something I'm going to need help with: being of a completely non-commercial bent, and never in my life having created anything that someone else would want, I can't put myself in the place of the person whose work I want to copy. All I can think of is that I'd be honored that somebody valued it that much.
And yet--I can certainly understand wanting recognition for the effort they've put in. (I read most of the site, and Jazz., it does mention the Web.) I think of your WWFTD site, and how angry you'd be if someone took a quote and implied it was theirs. And that doesn't even bring in the
issue about money. What a mess.
Jo, if we need a guideline for how or if we quote things on AWADtalk, it's going to have to come from somebody who knows a lot more than I do.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,891
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,891 |
Has anyone sent a note off to Father Steve...being a judge, I would think he might have a better handle on this (or know someone who does)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
>But we're dealing with international copywrite laws... I'm sorry jazz, but I just can't take your comment seriously as long as you don't recognize the difference between copywrite and copyright -- it's the right to copy that we're talking about. (copywrite would be adjectivizing the noun copywriter) 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 427
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 427 |
From the MHRA Style Book, 4th Edition (London: Modern Humanities Research Association, 1991] (p. 30): It is the responsibility of an author to obtain permission for the quotation of any copyright material if such permission is necessary. Normally it is unnecessary to seek permission for the quotation of brief passages in a scholarly work [...] In general, it may be said that the length of the quoted passage and the use to which it is put should be fair to the author and publisher of the work quoted in that nothing is done to diminish the value of their publication.These are the guidelines for us researchers who are not at all legal experts and still need to use quotes and refer to other people's work in our own. I think the key phrase here is "the length of the quoted passage and the use to which it is put should be fair to the author and publisher". We are using the material here for learning purposes, and as far as I can see, people who use extraneous material on this site provide sources and references alongside. Both of these seem to me to be quite "fair" practices.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
OP
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
>That doesn't seem to deal with either international standards or the internet. UK law is based on European law in this area, so I'd be surprised if other European countries are much different. Once the Aussies and Kiwis and wake up they can check out their laws. Comparing the site below: http://ahds.ac.uk/bkgd/copyrightfaq.html#faq3to Tsuwm's USA site it looks like the broad brush strokes are similar, including the same concept of "fair dealing". Interestingly (or not), I note that the lifetime of the copyright for literary works (including e-mail!) is 70 years after death of the author, compared to 50 years in the USA (and was until recently based on the date of the published work). There are clearly differences in detail but the basic concept on which the law is based is similar. Literary Works: Written works Includes lyrics, tables, compilations, computer programmes, letters, memoranda, e-mail and WWW pages. Authors life plus 70 years after death. Anonymous/corporation authors: 70 years from year of publication. Special rules for unpublished works
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,651
Members9,187
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
792
guests, and
3
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
