Using quote from book?

[Cartman94]

I'm writing a sister-sister incest story and I found a quote from a female writer online that was used in one of her books a long time ago about what love is. I would like to put this in my story, but I don't know if it's completely legal.

I wrote the quote and then put a - and her name after it. Is this okay to use?

This person died ten years ago, but I just wanted to be sure.

Thanks.

 

[RoyceConnors]

I'm writing a sister-sister incest story and I found a quote from a female writer online that was used in one of her books a long time ago about what love is. I would like to put this in my story, but I don't know if it's completely legal.

I wrote the quote and then put a - and her name after it. Is this okay to use?

This person died ten years ago, but I just wanted to be sure.

Thanks.

It's okay to use, as long as the author is mentioned by name and given credit. You can even put a star after the quote and mention the source at the end of the story.

 

[Cartman94]

It's okay to use, as long as the author is mentioned by name and given credit. You can even put a star after the quote and mention the source at the end of the story.

Thanks. It's a beautiful quote and I'm happy I can use it.

 

[sr71plt]

Legally, you aren't safe using more than 50 words total of it in anything that isn't a critique of the work it came from. Law is mushy on this point, but custom has settled on the 50 words.

Not that anyone is likely to come after you on it. There wouldn't be any profit involved, so it wouldn't be worth the effort in most cases.

 

[RoyceConnors]

Legally, you aren't safe using more than 50 words total of it in anything that isn't a critique of the work it came from. Law is mushy on this point, but custom has settled on the 50 words.

Not that anyone is likely to come after you on it. There wouldn't be any profit involved, so it wouldn't be worth the effort in most cases.

I read that before, myself. It's called a quote, which causes the debate on how many words designates a quote, instead of a copyright issue.

 

[LaRascasse]

As long as you attribute the source, it shouldn't be a problem.

 

[sr71plt]

As long as you attribute the source, it shouldn't be a problem.

As I noted, it doesn't matter what you attribute, legally speaking, you don't have support for using more than 50 words total. As long as your question is what is legal, as opposed to what is actually likely to happen.

There's no "I'm guessing" to this answer.

 

[RoyceConnors]

As I noted, it doesn't matter what you attribute, legally speaking, you don't have support for using more than 50 words total. As long as your question is what is legal, as opposed to what is actually likely to happen.

There's no "I'm guessing" to this answer.

The best idea is to Google "Quoting Authors in a story" and get the definitive answer by the professionals and governing bodies. I've gone as far as to favourite the Copyright Act of Canada, It links me to other sites I need to answer questions of legalities.

 

[sr71plt]

No, the best idea is to work with copyright in the publishing industry. I do.

But when the question is asked and I've given the industry answer, I guess the poster is on his own with all of the "My Aunt Hazel thinks" responses. That's what they get for asking strangers on an Internet discussion board.

There's actually no guaranteed legal support for quoting even one word from someone's copyrighted book in the United States. There is no law or case law pinning this down. It's all a matter of what the convention "safe" limit it is depending on your use and across the industry experience. Most publisher's instructions say 50 words total. A few, like Wiley, go up to 300 words--but that is for scholarly works where concepts are being compared.

And for songs, it's even briefer than 50 words. Not more than two lines for even the longer lyrics. And in the music industry, they sue at the drop of a hat.

 

[RoyceConnors]

No, the best idea is to work with copyright in the publishing industry. I do.

But when the question is asked and I've given the industry answer, I guess the poster is on his own with all of the "My Aunt Hazel thinks" responses. That's what they get for asking strangers on an Internet discussion board.

Uhm, didn't I just say that? Note, Copyright Act of Canada, which is part of the DMCA, which is worldwide in scope. I don't guess and find an arrest warrant waiting for me, or a law suit. Lit is good at keeping things safe for us and writing at will, but self publishing something, without consulting the legalities of what you wrote put into question, well..... c'est la vie.

 

[oggbashan]

I quoted extensively from Chairman Mao in my story: Getting Nude With Chairman Mao

No one has sent the enforcers after me - yet.

 

[sr71plt]

Did the OP say he was writing in Canada? (If he's posting to Literotica, he's not publishing in Canada--he's publishing under U.S. law.) If so, I missed that. Maybe I should have looked the author up first. It hits me that I didn't even establish what gender the author is. Of course, Canada has nothing to do with something published in the United States (where this Web site is registered).

 

[sr71plt]

I quoted extensively from Chairman Mao in my story: Getting Nude With Chairman Mao

No one has sent the enforcers after me - yet.

Chairman Mao's utterances were public domain. (I made an early career out of analyzing what Chairman Mao said).

And what I posted about Canadian copyright used for Literotica applies equally to UK copyright, Og. It's irrelevant to this U.S.-registered Web site.

And beyond that, did you miss that the question was what was legal and each of my responses indicated what the author probably could get away with on Literotica?

There really are some hardheaded folks around here on the subject of copyright who are insisting that wishful thinking holds just because it's convenient for them.

 

[oggbashan]

Chairman Mao's utterances were public domain. (I made an early career out of analyzing what Chairman Mao said).

And what I posted about Canadian copyright used for Literotica applies equally to UK copyright, Og. It's irrelevant to this U.S.-registered Web site.

...

I am aware I am publishing in the US. But UK copyright also applies to me because I am UK based.

Because I am publishing for free on Literotica I am aware that I am effectively giving away my copyright. Although I would object if someone claimed that my work was theirs, particularly if they were trying to make money from my stories, I know that realistically I have no chance of redress.

 

[Dyslexicea]

As I noted, it doesn't matter what you attribute, legally speaking, you don't have support for using more than 50 words total. As long as your question is what is legal, as opposed to what is actually likely to happen.

There's no "I'm guessing" to this answer.

We at times do agree, Pilot is absolutely correct. It's why publisher have copyright & permissions departments.

 

[sr71plt]

I am aware I am publishing in the US. But UK copyright also applies to me because I am UK based.

On your consternation on using Mao's quotes, just so that you can start sleeping easier at night, I dug out my first definitive English-language edition of "The Little Red Book," Quotations from Chairman Mao Tsetung. No copyright. It was public domain from the beginning. Published by the Foreign Languages Press in Peking (an interesting rendering, since the communists dropped this transliteration style in favor of Pinyin, which renders the city Beijing), in 1965.

All that sweat for nothing.

And, regardless of the Berne convention, anyone wanting to sue anyone on something published in the United States has to hold a U.S. formal copyright to get a court date in the United States. And suing anyone from outside the United States for infringement by a U.S. publisher doesn't have any teeth in it. The United States won't enforce it.

 

[oggbashan]

On your consternation on using Mao's quotes, just so that you can start sleeping easier at night, I dug out my first definitive English-language edition of "The Little Red Book," Quotations from Chairman Mao Tsetung. No copyright. It was public domain from the beginning. Published by the Foreign Languages Press in Peking (an interesting rendering, since the communists dropped this transliteration style in favor of Pinyin, which renders the city Beijing), in 1965.

All that sweat for nothing.

I wasn't sweating. I knew Mao was free to use when I wrote that story.

And, regardless of the Berne convention, anyone wanting to sue anyone on something published in the United States has to hold a U.S. formal copyright to get a court date in the United States. And suing anyone from outside the United States for infringement by a U.S. publisher doesn't have any teeth in it. The United States won't enforce it.

I know. The US used to be the world's worst offenders on copyright, and had been since its founding. Unless the work is formally copyrighted in the US it has no protection at all. 19th Century authors - Charles Dickens, Rudyard Kipling, W S Gilbert (of Gilbert and Sullivan) - went to extraordinary lengths to establish copyright in the US - and STILL got ripped off by US publishers.

Nothing much has changed except that parts of South and East Asia and some Eastern European countries are now the worst offenders on breaching copyright and stealing intellectual property. The US is still on the list...

 

[sr71plt]

And so you implied a copyright issue connection with your "no one has sent the enforcers" because . . . ?

 

[RoyceConnors]

Did the OP say he was writing in Canada? (If he's posting to Literotica, he's not publishing in Canada--he's publishing under U.S. law.) If so, I missed that. Maybe I should have looked the author up first. It hits me that I didn't even establish what gender the author is. Of course, Canada has nothing to do with something published in the United States (where this Web site is registered).

I disagree with you and advise you to look up the DMCA and participating countries. Every member country abides by the same rules and laws, therefore whether I wrote a story in Canada, U.S., or the UK, the laws are the same. One of the reasons I keep it handy, for just such an issue. All Copyright Acts were amended to reflect the decisions made at the convention, which I believe was 1997.

 

[sr71plt]

I disagree with you and advise you to look up the DMCA and participating countries. Every member country abides by the same rules and laws, therefore whether I wrote a story in Canada, U.S., or the UK, the laws are the same. One of the reasons I keep it handy, for just such an issue. All Copyright Acts were amended to reflect the decisions made at the convention, which I believe was 1997.

No, the laws aren't the same.

You haven't been reading the forum very carefully. The United States signed the Berne Convention of 1887 in 1997, but put no teeth into enforcing it (on purpose). This fact has been covered on this forum ad nauseum. The U.S. government is counting on people just not getting it (as you haven't done), because it has no intention of clogging its courts with he said/he said copyright cases.

It's OK with me if you just keep on not getting it. I've restated reality on the thread. It's up to those affected to understand it or not.

 

[RoyceConnors]

No, the laws aren't the same.

You haven't been reading the forum very carefully. The United States signed the Berne Convention of 1887 in 1997, but put no teeth into enforcing it (on purpose). This fact has been covered on this forum ad nauseum. The U.S. government is counting on people just not getting it (as you haven't done), because it has no intention of clogging its courts with he said/he said copyright cases.

It's OK with me if you just keep on not getting it. I've restated reality on the thread. It's up to those affected to understand it or not.

I checked the FAQ section here and it clearly states a writer's copyright is protected under DMCA rules. If the US isn't enforcing those rules, they are in breach of the ACT and can be held accountable for lack of enforcement. Every member country is protected, so that whether I write in Canada and post on an American site, I am protected for copyright.

So, you saying the U.S. won't enforce it purposefully, is saying the writers are subject to infringements and the agencies aren't liable for their inaction to defend them. Napster comes to mind and look how that turned out for some. They enforced that to no end. The owners here don't want to see their writers face the same problem, but in this case, there is no monetary penalty to get greedy hands on.
Publishing methods might have changed, but the rules haven't and if I find the US in breach of enforcing the rules, they'll be in court.

 

[ishtat]

A prayer to St Jude perhaps?

I disagree with you and advise you to look up the DMCA and participating countries. Every member country abides by the same rules and laws, therefore whether I wrote a story in Canada, U.S., or the UK, the laws are the same. One of the reasons I keep it handy, for just such an issue. All Copyright Acts were amended to reflect the decisions made at the convention, which I believe was 1997.

Pilot is right on this issue Royce. The US may have signed up to the Berne convention but signature alone is pretty worthless. In a former corporate life in the USA I had some experience of pursuing copyright breaches of American material in the US courts for American plaintiffs. It still ain't easy because of court rules and conventions to be overcome before the court will even look at the dispute - and then the judge in many jurisdictions is horribly likely to send the disputants off for 'voluntary' (which essentially means compulsory) 'mediation'.

My pet beef with respect to copyright is the way that universities and their academics abuse their privileges. Many Universities publish vast amounts of material (particularly on the internet) on the pretext that they are teaching on the subject when they frequently are not. The same academics will then scream blue murder if they even think one tiny fraction of their pearls of wisdom has not been attributed to them. But could they be sued successfully? Not a hope.

 

[oggbashan]

And so you implied a copyright issue connection with your "no one has sent the enforcers" because . . . ?

The Chinese are sensitive about portrayals of Mao - copyright or not.

 

[oggbashan]

I disagree with you and advise you to look up the DMCA and participating countries. Every member country abides by the same rules and laws, therefore whether I wrote a story in Canada, U.S., or the UK, the laws are the same. One of the reasons I keep it handy, for just such an issue. All Copyright Acts were amended to reflect the decisions made at the convention, which I believe was 1997.

As sr71plt and Ishtat have said, the US is different.

Your work is protected in Canada, and by most signatories to the Berne Convention, but is NOT protected in the US unless you formally copyright it (and pay the fees).

Even then, as a non-US citizen, your rights are minimal. Attempting to enforce your copyright in US courts would cost more than most of us could afford, and even with expensive US lawyers your chances of success are very small.

 

[RoyceConnors]

As sr71plt and Ishtat have said, the US is different.

Your work is protected in Canada, and by most signatories to the Berne Convention, but is NOT protected in the US unless you formally copyright it (and pay the fees).

Even then, as a non-US citizen, your rights are minimal. Attempting to enforce your copyright in US courts would cost more than most of us could afford, and even with expensive US lawyers your chances of success are very small.

Thank God I live in Canada then. I know they will prosecute here. Not enforcing the laws, just shows how little the US thinks of their own people, which isn't new news. I stand corrected in my previous comments, ty.