Fair use

[hairballxavier]

What does USPO consider to be "fair use" of copyrighted literature? For example, is it OK to quote a couple of paragraphs from a book in the forums? How about an entire page?

[Dick Martin]

What does USPO consider to be "fair use" of copyrighted literature? For example, is it OK to quote a couple of paragraphs from a book in the forums? How about an entire page?

"One of the rights accorded to the owner of copyright is the right to reproduce or to authorize others to reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords. This right is subject to certain limitations found in sections 107 through 118 of the copyright law (title 17, U. S. Code). One of the more important limitations is the doctrine of “fair use.” The doctrine of fair use has developed through a substantial number of court decisions over the years and has been codified in section 107 of the copyright law.

Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:

1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of 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
4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work

The distinction between fair use and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission. Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission. ..."

U.S. Copyright Office - Fair Use

I would think that uses here would fall easily under #1 and #4?

[skeptic1]

"One of the rights accorded to the owner of copyright is the right to reproduce or to authorize others to reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords. This right is subject to certain limitations found in sections 107 through 118 of the copyright law (title 17, U. S. Code). One of the more important limitations is the doctrine of “fair use.” The doctrine of fair use has developed through a substantial number of court decisions over the years and has been codified in section 107 of the copyright law.

Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:

1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of 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
4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work

The distinction between fair use and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission. Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission. ..."

U.S. Copyright Office - Fair Use

I would think that uses here would fall easily under #1 and #4?

I think the big rub in respect to USPOL is that while the individual poster in virtually all cases would simply be faced with only a request by the original author to "Cease and Desist" because no monetary value is involved VS the possible position of USPOL being judged for various reasons as perhaps benefitting financially. IMO, little danger of this occuring but considered as a remote possibility and they would rather avoid a confrontation and cost.. Of course this would ruin the concept of USPOL in presenting objective argument with supporting evidence of various natures and a competing forum would "eat their lunch" by the absence of restriction. Have at it !

[MattInFla]

With the advent of the DMCA, "fair use" has really been reduced to nothingness.

Under the DMCA, unless the website has paid to register a removal contact, any use of copyrighted material can lead to a lawsuit.

[Steerpike]

With the advent of the DMCA, "fair use" has really been reduced to nothingness.

Under the DMCA, unless the website has paid to register a removal contact, any use of copyrighted material can lead to a lawsuit.

What does this mean in terms of site policy on quoting (online) articles in threads?

[hairballxavier]

Well the reason I asked is because I was quoting a book and right after I posted it, I thought to myself...."Am I allowed to do that here"? "Or is that against the forum rules?"

I'll just assume it's OK with USPOL.

[Disillusioned_1]

Unless the article is ridiculously short, you shouldn't post the entire article. Instead you can usually post a paragraph or two and the link to the article. If the article is so short that you are copying the whole thing in one paragraph, then you should certainly at least provide a link even if you're also pasting the article. I don't think USPOL could get in trouble with those limitations (and that is the policy), although I'm not a copyright attorney. Also, most articles aren't actually copyrighted as that's actually a legal filing that has to be made and fees must be paid, which I doubt most on-line article sources are bothering to do for every article they produce.

[soot]

I'm neither a moderator nor a lawyer, but I am a librarian and I run into this issue of fair use frequently (was just discussing it with my boss earlier as a matter of fact).

If the information is in the public domain, you give credit where credit is due (citation and/or link), and you don't make an immediate profit off of the use of the information, then you're pretty much good to go.

Doesn't really matter where you get the information either.

Could be a book you own, one you borrowed, or virtual content off a server somewhere.

If anyone is going to look in to a fair use issue on an internet chat forum at all (and they almost certainly won't) they're going to look at one thing: does this use of the information substantially infringe on the creators right to profit from the work.

If you quote, word for word, a number of poems from a recently released book of poetry that hasn't yet hit the Internet, then you're in violation of fair use practices because there is a likelihood that you're going to hurt the poet's chances of selling his book and profiting off of his work.

If you quote, word for word, several paragraphs from a 300 page book you're not taking enough of the proprietary material to really do the author any harm. In fact, you're likely even helping him by circulating his name, the title of his work, and a general sense of what his ideas are to an audience that will likely appreciate the suggestion.

The acid test is really whether or not the use of copywritten material harms the author in a demonstrable way.