Copyright & the Internet

Home Forums Miscellaneous Copyright & the Internet

This topic contains 5 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by  Justin Mosebach 8 years ago.

  • Author
  • #114788


    So what ARE the rules?? Searched the internet and couldn’t find anything pertaining to copyright law as it specifically relates to articles/blogs posted on a website and if you, the reader puts that write-up on another website. My thoughts are that you have given credit and cited the source if you post the article in its entirety, you must provide the source (list the website), the author, and date it was published (if it is listed), and including the link to the article on the website where you found the written piece. Is this not correct?

  • #114798

    Justin Mosebach

    I’m not a lawyer and this should not be taken as legal advice, but here’s some research I’ve previously done on this kind of thing:

    Blog Law Blog
    – “A while back, I noted that under most circumstances, there is no good argument that reposting an entire newspaper story on the web qualifies as fair use under U.S. copyright law.”

    Here’s part of what the AP’s website terms are (not sure if this also applies to its news content):
    – 5. Except as provided in this agreement, you may not copy, reproduce, publish, transmit, transfer, sell, rent, modify, create derivative works from, distribute, repost, perform, display, or in any way commercially exploit the Materials carried on this site, nor may you infringe upon any of the copyrights or other intellectual property rights contained in the Materials. You may not remove or alter, nor cause to be removed or altered, any copyright, trademark, or other proprietary notices or visual marks and logos from the Materials.

    Here’s what Reuters has for their Copyright on the website:
    – “All rights reserved. Users may download and print extracts of content from this website for their own personal and non-commercial use only. Republication or redistribution of Thomson Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Thomson Reuters. Thomson Reuters and its logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of the Thomson Reuters group of companies around the world.

    © Thomson Reuters 2010”

    From the L.A. Times in an article entitled “Reblog this at your own legal risk”:
    – “Excerpts of text generally fall within the “fair-use” doctrine of U.S. copyright law. Bloggers can freely use parts of someone else’s writing to help make a point. Wholesale reproduction of an article is never a good idea. Still, courts may be more lenient with noncommercial blogs — so there’s solid reason to think twice about slapping up Google ads.”

    From another L.A. Times article entitled “On the Media: Las Vegas Review-Journal bares its claws”:
    – “The rub has been where to draw the line to determine what, exactly, constitutes “fair use.” Stacks of court cases suggest many factors must be weighed — the amount of material reused, the purpose of the reuse (commentary and criticism get wide latitude) and, especially, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled, the economic effect on the copyright holder.”
    – “”Fair use” on the Internet would seem to be a use that probes and ponders the original, possibly repackaging or rewriting it, without subsuming it. A fair use calls attention to an interesting story or news flash, perhaps elaborates on it or disputes it, but doesn’t replace it.”

  • #114796

    Henry Brown

    Varies wildly between each web site. In some cases your methodology works rather well, Other sites request you send the author a request to repost, other sites require that you purchase a release for republishing, other sites do NOT permit you to repost the entire article. The reason I have been given for the latter one is the author is paid on number of “clicks”

    What I do GENERALLY, is I try to leave a comment to the author requesting the policy of either author or organization. SOMETIMES I get lazy and will get jerked back to reality rather quickly!

  • #114794


    @Justin @ Henry – Thanks for the responses. So it would seem that posting part of an article here on GovLoop and then the link to the rest of the article isn’t within copyright rules either. Interesting… yet so many people here on GovLoop link to articles on different websites. Understand the whole “clicks” thing to get paid, but there are so many websites these days that once you visit them, they begin tracking you. I suspect this makes people unwilling to click the link and read on further.

  • #114792

    Henry Brown

    That is why I use Firefox with Cookie controls

  • #114790

    James Bryce Clark

    Tricia, the thing is, there ARE no “special different” rules for the Internet.
    Some quotes and excerpts are considered reasonable (“fair use”), while others aren’t. It’s a topic for a treatise — and people disagree about where to draw the line, or when to demand a takedown or sue! — so no-one’s likely to want to give you abstract legal advice on what exactly is safe. You can get the sense of the issue on Wikipedia:
    You might want to bear in mind:
    — Some degrees of summary, that pull out a sentence or two from longer works, or summarize in your own words, often are considered OK. But there sometimes are rules around that too; some authors and their carnivorous lawyers are crankier than others.
    — Generally, commercial publishers (web or otherwise) don’t like it, if you take text they paid for, and charge for or get advertising revenue from, and put the whole darn thing somewhere else where it can be read for free. Authors who HAVE thought about it, and ARE comfortable with their work being widely shared or reprinted, under specific conditions, often will SAY SO, such as by indicating a “Creative Commons” license or other specific statement that it’s OK to reprint.
    Apologies from Lawyer World for this not being a simple issue.
    Good luck! JBC

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.