Anyone know a good copyright attorney interested in splitting awards 50/50?
I wonder how many bloggers know what the symbol to the left means? Seems like there are some that don’t.
No, it doesn’t mean Christmas!
I really wish I didn’t have to write this. But I feel compelled to do so.
I’ve been blogging 9 months and I try to make sure I don’t violate copyright laws. Copyright laws do enter gray territory at times, and sometimes it isn’t really clear what is allowed and what is not. I hope that I’ve always stayed within the law. I use photos from Wikipedia, as it’s stated there what you can and cannot do. I hear a lot of people bring up “fair use”. Laws vary from country to country. It gets complicated and fuzzy.
When blogging, I often quote papers, online articles and provide excerpts, always making sure to cite and link to the sources. I think people who wrote the original material deserve credit and recognition for their work. I like linking to other sites, hoping that the little extra traffic I generate will make them happy. What goes around, comes around.
What do other bloggers think? I’d be interested to know. Maybe I’m naive about all this.
I must say I’m surprised by the number of sites that simply copy and paste ENTIRE stories and paste them at their site, without even asking. This has been done to me more than once, and with increasing frequency lately. With one of my recent posts I found 6 other sites that did this with my story – not one asked for permission to do so. Sure they provided a link, but who needs to click on it when it’s all there?
I don’t want to sound like I’m crying about it, but geez, c’mon, it sure would be nice if people asked. Like hello! I’m not there to carry your water.
Don’t get me wrong, I love it when other blogs pick up on the stuff I write. It really feels rewarding. All I ask is that bloggers post the first 30% of the content or so, or excerpts, followed by a direct link to the original story. Is that too much to ask? Am I being naive?
Tom Nelson does an outstanding job in respecting other people’s work. Tom always posts a few main excerpts, some content, then followed by a link to the original story. This way everyone is happy.
I noticed some sites that copy and paste entire stories without permission also have advertisements at their sites, meaning they are gaining financially by copying and pasting. In this case the originators of the content have the right to compensation.
I’m not going to go after past infractions, but in the future I’m not going to let these things slide as much anymore. Bloggers who benefit financially from advertising at their sites, or receive donations, and decide to copy and paste entire stories from NTZ will have to expect to hand over a cut of their profits, willingly or unwillingly.
All in all, I’m just hoping everyone will agree to play fair in the future.
Merry Christmas everyone.
Merry Christmas Piere. What you ask seems fair and right so i say go for it. I do not know a lawyer for this but i would imagine you will need a international lawyer for this as blogs are world wide. Again Merry Christmas now get back to the wife before she catches you on the puter.
I have gone over similar grounds in the past.
After reading about “fair use” laws in my country.It is best to except NO MORE than 25% of the entire article and less is better.To reduce the possibility that the original writer of the article does not get aggrieved.They can be unhappy even with small excerpts,when it is the MOST IMPORTANT PART OF THE ARTICLE.
I read of one example of even a single paragraph from a BOOK,was all it took to promote a lawsuit.That was because that paragraph was THE most important paragraph of the book.It rendered the rest of the book not worth reading for many,who wanted the answer only.
Associated Press (AP) has made it clear about 2 years ago,that they will be aggressive with anyone who post even an excerpt at all.They claim total copyright protection.You now have to ASK permission to post an excerpt.
All they allow is post the headline and the source link,without asking for permission.More than that you MUST ask,to be able post an excerpt.
Now because of that absurd position,they are getting a lot less exposure than before.But that may have been in response to many people NOT providing small excerpts in the first place.Probably too many times they were quoted in whole and not post a link back to the original source.
Believe me that many who are stupid enough to do that.
My policy at my Blog and Forum is that 25% excerpt is the MAXIMUM size I allow.Must post a working source link with it.
I posted this in July 2009,soon after I took ownership of the forum:
Submitting News Guidelines
http://globalwarmingskeptics.info/forums/thread-11.html
In the link I made a desired post that I wanted to see in my forum with comments for every step of the way in making an Excerpted post.
I suggest that you create your own blog entry on how YOU want people to properly excerpt from your presentations.
You mean THIS Associated Press?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/12/aps-seth-borenstein-is-just-too-damn-cozy-with-the-people-he-covers-time-for-ap-to-do-somethig-about-it/
LMAO, i could just as well get my news from “onion”, the current warmist troll at WUWT.
Copyright is a thorny issue, but extracts under fair use, and links to the article
are acceptable practice, otherwise no one could quote anybody else. I suggest that if your articles are ‘on the money’ in an emotive issue such as the ‘global warming scam’, then you will get more exposure if they are highlighted in other blogs etc.
You may be writing a book about you experiences, then that is another issue that would involve copyright, (except if if you are Google and ignore copyright law and copy whole books etc).
Err .. guilty, if I post a link, I will use excerpts to portray the gist of the article, PG, I usually only post at Delingpole, WUWT, Tav, Bish’, EU ref’, Jo Nova – and I do not ask permission but I always (hyper) link the item.
If you wish me to stop, it will be stopped but I was under the impression it was a quid pro quo situation.
Apologies, Edward.
If I want to refer to another site I usually just include a link to the appropriate article. Occasionally I might copy/paste a line or sentence to illustrate, but no more.
I hope this is O.K?
Sure that’s fine.
Like I wrote, even if you cut and past the first 25%, then followed by the URL, that’s fine. I guess I need to set up a page with the conditions.
And reading into this more myself, I’m no longer sure if I’m even allowed to quote and cite online newspapers, as Sunsettommy comments above. That seems odd.
That is the price of fame with your warmer, colder winters. I wouldn’t worry too much about it. And regarding adverting revenue, I don’t know, but I would think it adds to up only pennies. Be proud that you are copied, that is a sign of success. Let it go for a while before you take action.
Most countries are signatories to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/trtdocs_wo001.html
Under Article 10bis of that; which applies most closely to publication on the Internet (IMHO); it’s up to the countries to legislate what is fair use, but “Nevertheless, the source must always be clearly indicated; “. NB: “clearly indicated”.
Wonkypedia has a non-expert guide at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#Fair_use_on_the_Internet
Note that the extent to which Copyright applies is defined by the laws of the applicable countries. i.e. it may or may not be sufficient to simply provide a URL to the original article as clearly indicating the source. It could be argued (perhaps) that the more content is quoted, the less likely it is that the link will be followed and the source become clear.
OTOH: I know that it’s extremely annoying to only see the URL without comment or a quoted “tease” to show what it’s about.
You could, if you were feeling adventurous, do as they do in retaliation.
Thanks Bernd,
That helps. I see, there’s a lot I have to find out about before I take this hobby of mine any further.
Pierre, take it easy.
Just end every article from your hand as followed:
(Copyright 2010 Pierre Gosselin, No Tricks Zone. All rights reserved. Please contact us about republishing.)
Or: republishing is granted under the condition that the original link to the article and reference to the author is published.
Don’t waste any time, money or effort on copyright issues because it won’t pay your bills.
Regards,
Ron
Bahh, Humbug !
ED:
It has been noticed that P Gosselin’s NoTricksZone has put up an article
about copyright HERE….our site is an online archive library
put up to serve the public, and raise awareness of the huge Global warming/Climate Change scam.
….Mr Gosselin states in the comments: “if you cut and past the first 25%, then followed by the URL, that’s fine.” ….our site will now only use RSS or blog feed for NoTricksZone. Merry Christmas everyone
Good to know your reaction. I use to reference some of your posts once in a while, as you have good info on what is happening in Germany. Normaly no more than a paragraph or so, with a link to the original post, in a post with many sources. Or just a reference as a list of links to posts with similar content.
But checking, I realize I translated once one of your posts, quite more than the 30% you fancy. Big apologies. It will not happen again. To make it sure, I am deleting your blog from my blogroll, and will not visit again. There is enough people who have not such problems, and who are quite happy to allow a re-post if it is done with due reference and links. I can think of Spencer, or Pielke, or McIntyre, or Watts, or Lucia, or Motl, etc, etc. I will not miss you.
I repeat my apology.
Sorry to hear your reaction.
But I’m happy to hear that Motl, McIntyre, Watts, Spencer, Pielke, Lucia, etc. don’t mind having their stuff reposted everywhere. I didn’t know that.
Plazaeme, don’t just walk away like that.
Pierre was angry because when people simply re-post his essays verbatim it takes away traffic from him. Now, when you translate into a different language, that’s a different thing, isn’t it? It spreads the word to people who wouldn’t read the original.
Pierre could relax his rules for translations and everyone would be fine.
Translation in other languages are fine. I wouldn’t have a problem with that.
I’ve seen my posts in Spanish, Portuguese, French and I got a nice boost inn traffic from it.
I don’t know why some people are getting angry and reacting all pissy about my modest request. I think it’s just fair. I guess it’s too much to ask of some people.
I would hate to think that, I had pissed you off, I find this site so useful, I have long wanted to know what was going on in Europe, especially the engine room ie, Germany.
We are all in this together, the Bruxelles Politburo do not want cross fertilisation of ideas, we must expropriate the idea [of the EU], that: “the science is settled” – how can it be? There is no science in AGW it is a miasma of BS, witchcraft lies and obfuscation.
We must be in contact with our allies in the states and further afield, this ain’t about a friendly debate, it is war….is it not, mein Freund und Kamerad?
Edward.