[Lautermilch]

Using Copyrighted Content on a Website – Including News Articles and Videos – Secure the Rights!

https://www.broadcastlawblog.com/20...g-news-articles-and-videos-secure-the-rights/

Even posting a single sentence of an article could lead to trouble.

 

[High Seas Drifter]

. . . The copying of any substantial part of a news article raises the same issues as posting pictures or video found on the Internet onto your site. . . . The concept of fair use is set out in Section 107 of the US Copyright Act. It basically allows for socially positive uses of copyrighted content without permission, but only where that use does not overly impinge on the financial value of the copyrighted work and effectively become a substitute for that work. . . . In conducting a fair use analysis, the Copyright Act says that you look at four factors:

The nature of the use – including whether the use is commercial or for non-profit or educational purposes;

The nature of the copyrighted work;

The amount or substantiality of the work that is used;

The effect of the use on the potential market value of the work itself.



-on Tapatalk

 

[High Seas Drifter]

The above is what UCF also taught. I stand by my fair use citations and believe they would hold up in any US court.

-on Tapatalk

 

[Lautermilch]

The above is what UCF also taught. I stand by my fair use citations and believe they would hold up in any US court.

-on Tapatalk

That could very well be true. But the problem is that the legal bill would go to the owners of the forum . . ., so I would not put them at risk.

 

[High Seas Drifter]

That could very well be true. But the problem is that the legal bill would go to the owners of the forum . . ., so I would not put them at risk.

Unless they tell me to stop, it's the wishes of a majority of the members here, and the members drive the revenue, soooo . . . :grin

I always have a been a "better to ask forgiveness than permission" type, but I'm venturing to say that "legal" has reviewed it and sees no issue.

I'm always willing to be corrected when necessary. Until then . . .

-on Tapatalk

 

[racer88]

In any case, you could write a quick summary in your own words to accompany the link. Just SOMETHING that hints at what the linked article or video is about.

 

[Lautermilch]

In any case, you could write a quick summary in your own words to accompany the link. Just SOMETHING that hints at what the linked article or video is about.

The job of the author is to use a title that conveys the basic information. If someone is too lazy to click then too bad.

 

[joecarry]

In any case, you could write a quick summary in your own words to accompany the link. Just SOMETHING that hints at what the linked article or video is about.

500 words or less please. :grin

 

[OHEng]

The job of the author is to use a title that conveys the basic information. If someone is too lazy to click then too bad.

More than a fair share of postings do NOT accurately convey the basic information. More often than not it contains some distortion or exaggeration solely intended to draw undeserved clicks or make one think the story is about X when it's really about Y. If you post it with faulty basic information, it's just the same as making it up yourself. The poster has some basic responsibility for knowing what the hell they are posting.

 

[Anduril]

More than a fair share of postings do NOT accurately convey the basic information. More often than not it contains some distortion or exaggeration solely intended to draw undeserved clicks or make one think the story is about X when it's really about Y. If you post it with faulty basic information, it's just the same as making it up yourself. The poster has some basic responsibility for knowing what the hell they are posting.

Which raises an interesting question:
What would you title a post about clickbait?

 

[Denverd0n]

Even posting a single sentence of an article could lead to trouble.

Nonsense. The concept of "fair use" still exists, and a brief synopsis -- yes, even including quotes -- would very obviously constitute fair use.

Frankly, my impression was that you sold photographs. Given that, I would expect you to have a better understanding of copyright law than this. I have had a fairly substantial number of articles published, both in academic and in commercial periodicals. As such, I have looked into copyright law fairly deeply. There is simply NO WAY that quoting a single sentence could lead to any sort of trouble at all. (Unless the entire "article" was just one sentence!)

 

[Denverd0n]

The job of the author is to use a title that conveys the basic information. If someone is too lazy to click then too bad.

And the job of someone who posts a link is to provide at least basic commentary. So, looks like YOU are "too lazy" also!

 

[mike_1950]

Just my opinion, and I am no lawyer but, I would think ....if the subject matter is in public display and no profit is obtained from the rebroadcast or share of viewing there would be no grounds to claim damages or any plagiarism.

 

[Denverd0n]

...no profit is obtained from the rebroadcast or share of viewing...

Very common misconception. Whether or not you make a profit off of copying someone else's work has no bearing at all on whether or not you violated their copyrights. It can play into the question of penalties you would face, but you absolutely can violate copyright law without making any profit -- intentional or otherwise -- off of the copying.

 

[BeerHunter]

^^^^
No, he was correct to say one "can violate copyright law. . ."

I believe NOT crediting the source plays a part, as well, but IANAL.

 

[Ronnie948]

You can use it if you do "NOT" get any $$$$$$ for a copyright image or story.
I did Photography and all of my images were under copyright protection. When I sold Photographs at the Art League or any show, they owned the picture but could not re-sell the image but were free to copy for their own personal use. Same with wedding pictures.
It is no different for news or magazine articles as long as it is "NOT" for commerce.
When I did sell "MY" images to a Magazine I made certain that my name was used with the image a article.
It is a sticky & tricky area and just do not get caught selling a persons copyrighted material for $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Ronnie

 

[racer88]

You can use it if you do "NOT" get any $$$$$$ for a copyright image or story.
I did Photography and all of my images were under copyright protection. When I sold Photographs at the Art League or any show, they owned the picture but could not re-sell the image but were free to copy for their own personal use. Same with wedding pictures.
It is no different for news or magazine articles as long as it is "NOT" for commerce.
When I did sell "MY" images to a Magazine I made certain that my name was used with the image a article.
It is a sticky & tricky area and just do not get caught selling a persons copyrighted material for $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Ronnie

This is absolutely incorrect.

Copyright and trademark infringements have NOTHING to do with whether the infringer gains financially from it. DenverDon's post is correct.

I've had both copyrighted and trademarked property used without permission and consulted with a friend who happens to be an attorney specializing in Intellectual Property. You could not be more wrong about this, Ronnie.

As DenverDon said, profiting has nothing to do whether there is a legal infringement of intellectual property rights. However, if a profit was made, it can affect the DAMAGES levied in a legal case. In fact, they call it, "treble damages." So, if you profit from using my IP, I can recover TRIPLE the amount you made from its unauthorized use. But, even if you didn't profit, the infringement issue still stands.

For fun, do a google search about "Getty Images copyright infringement lawsuits." They went after ANYONE who used their images in ANY capacity (without regard to profit).

 

[NotXskinnyXBarbie]

In any case, you could write a quick summary in your own words to accompany the link. Just SOMETHING that hints at what the linked article or video is about.

Oh...but then a click baiter would need to read the article...interpret it ...and WRITE his own sentence with his own words...!!! Geez. You asking people to think. You fascist, you...

:grin

Sent from my LM-X410(FG) using Tapatalk

 

[Ronnie948]

Like I said,
It is a sticky & tricky area and just do not get caught selling a persons copyrighted material for $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Ronnie

 

[Denverd0n]

Like I said,
It is a sticky & tricky area and just do not get caught selling a persons copyrighted material for $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Ronnie

And as you have been told already, more than once, money has NOTHING to do with it!

If you don't know what you are talking about, perhaps you should stop talking!