Quoting a published work

[August_Bouvier]

I'd like to include part of a poem in an upcoming story. If I credit the poem's author at the end of the story, would that cover any copyright isses?


Thanks,

August

 

[sr71plt]

I'd like to include part of a poem in an upcoming story. If I credit the poem's author at the end of the story, would that cover any copyright isses?


Thanks,

August

No, not unless you used only two lines of a poem that was at least ten lines long. If you used only two lines (total) of a poem at least this long, then yes.

Now, we will have reams and reams of testimonals of what people (so far) have gotten away with--which is fine for whoever wants to take the risk, which is minimal. But what I stated is publishing industry standard. There is almost no chance that you would be caught and sued for not following publishing industry standard, though. If you are seeking some sort of assurance of safety by asking the question, however, there's no one here who can guarantee that safety no matter what they've heard, assumed, or think they've experienced.

 

[Guest]

I'd like to include part of a poem in an upcoming story. If I credit the poem's author at the end of the story, would that cover any copyright isses?


Thanks,

August

There is always confusion over this issue here. Here are a couple of sources.

http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-fairuse.html

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 Act (title 17, U. S. Code). One of the more important limitations is the doctrine of “fair use.” Although fair use was not mentioned in the previous copyright law, the doctrine has developed through a substantial number of court decisions over the years. This doctrine 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. 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 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.

The 1961 Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law cites examples of activities that courts have regarded as fair use: “quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author's observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report; reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported.”

Copyright protects the particular way an author has expressed himself; it does not extend to any ideas, systems, or factual information conveyed in the work.

The safest course is always to get permission from the copyright owner before using copyrighted material. The Copyright Office cannot give this permission.

When it is impracticable to obtain permission, use of copyrighted material should be avoided unless the doctrine of “fair use” would clearly apply to the situation. The Copyright Office can neither determine if a certain use may be considered “fair” nor advise on possible copyright violations. If there is any doubt, it is advisable to consult an attorney.

FL-102, Revised July 2006



http://www.publaw.com/fairuse.html

Fair Use: Interpretations and Guidelines - The Fair Use Doctrine Part II
© Copyright 1996 Lloyd L. Rich

This article is a continuation of an article called "How Much of Someone Else's Work May I Use Without Asking Permission", which discussed the statutory codification, judicial interpretation, and general parameters of the "fair use doctrine".

This column discusses specific fair use judicial decisions in an attempt to show how some courts have interpreted the use, without permission, of another's copyrighted work, and hopefully will help you evaluate whether a particular use of a copyrighted work will be protected by the fair use doctrine.

Any attempt to understand the basis for specific judicial decisions must take into consideration the fact that the fair use doctrine is not intended to be a rigid, fixed body of law, but is instead a flexible body of law that varies with the specific circumstances of a particular case. It is for this reason that fair use judicial decisions are difficult to predict and sometimes very difficult to reconcile with previous decisions.

How Much Can One Use of Literary Works?

Many authors and publishers have the perception that the law provides specific guidelines relating to the number of words one can use of a copied work. Although rumors persist as to word-count guidelines, it is safe to conclude that the law does not provide a specific word-count that will be designated as fair use of another's work. Some examples of the scope of such word-count variances are the following: (i) 300 words quoted in a magazine article from approximately 30,000 words in President Gerald Ford's manuscript of his memoirs was not fair use, (ii) 200 words quoted from the unpublished letters of J.D. Salinger in an unauthorized biography was deemed not to be fair use, (iii) the photocopying of entire scientific and medical journal articles was found in one instance not to be fair use (American Geophysical Union v. Texaco, Inc., 1994), and in another instance to be fair use (Williams & Wilkins Co. v. United States, 1975), and (iv) placing unpublished Church of Scientology materials in their entirety on an Internet bulletin board was found to be fair use.

One may ask, "Why are there no absolute rules?" Probably the simplest, and yet most unsatisfactory answer is that the specific circumstances of each case differ. The court when evaluating fair use analyzes four separate factors to determine whether the fair use defense applies in the specific case. These factors are the following:

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; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."

Because the court in analyzing fair use considers all of the above four factors -- no single factor is and of itself sufficient to prove fair use -- a brief review of two cases should be helpful in understanding how the court reached its decision on the fair use issue.

 

[sr71plt]

Because the court in analyzing fair use considers all of the above four factors -- no single factor is and of itself sufficient to prove fair use -- a brief review of two cases should be helpful in understanding how the court reached its decision on the fair use issue.

It's true that no single factor of the four listed is sufficient to prove fair use--but a single factor is enough to disprove fair use. The first-listed factor rules out, and makes "fair use" claims irrelevant for, erotica on a Web site. A court wouldn't consider its use as being for educational purposes and it would consider that it was a commercial use (the Web site collects from advertisers)--both of which are conditions to deny applicability of fair use.

So, "fair use" is simply irrelevant to writing here.

Copyright admittedly is hard to understand.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Copyright is not hard to understand...

If I write it, publish it, post it, sing it, it's mine.

You want to use it in whole or in part you need my permission.

It's as simple as that, except for fair use then it gets complicated but not too complicated.

If you're not a critic, a teacher, a reporter, a researcher or a scholar using it in you chosen profession or in pursuit of that profession then you need to ask.

Writing smut you plan on posting to the web is none of those.

 

[starrkers]

Copyright is not hard to understand...

If I write it, publish it, post it, sing it, it's mine.

You want to use it in whole or in part you need my permission.

It's as simple as that, except for fair use then it gets complicated but not too complicated.

If you're not a critic, a teacher, a reporter, a researcher or a scholar using it in you chosen profession or in pursuit of that profession then you need to ask.

Writing smut you plan on posting to the web is none of those.

Well said, that man.

 

[sr71plt]

Copyright is not hard to understand...

Well, it appears to be hard to understand by some here--living in a world of wishful thinking and "me first."

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Well said, that man.

Thanks...

 

[colddiesel]

I'd like to include part of a poem in an upcoming story. If I credit the poem's author at the end of the story, would that cover any copyright isses?


Thanks,

August

All this discussion assumes the quoted work is still in copyright. Is It? If the poet is dead you will need to know when the work was first published and where. Where because outside of the US different copywright periods apply though in recent years they seem to be converging. Geneally the US law is the most restrictive.

 

[August_Bouvier]

The poet died in 1931, the poem in question was published in 1923.

 

[sr71plt]

The poet died in 1931, the poem in question was published in 1923.

Then it's likely free game (although this can't be assumed; this is in the date range of possibly still under renewed copyright). Although there isn't a comprehensive listing of poetry in the public domain (good lists exist for books at the Gutenberg Project site at http://www.promo.net and for songs at the Public Domain Information Project site at http://www.pdinfo.com), you could check your poem at http://www.mickputtock.com/.

 

[August_Bouvier]

Thank you. I'll check out those sites.