Copyright is an issue that I find myself constantly having
to deal with. So much so, that at times
that I’ve considered giving up writing for the net.
I frequently have to do a check to see if any of my work has
been stolen and used elsewhere on the net, and often enough, it is. I’ve been criticised for my use of the word
stolen, but under copyright law, that’s exactly what it is.
It doesn’t matter if you credit me, it doesn’t matter if you
provide a link back to the original, if you have used an article of mine
without my permission, you have breached copyright laws and I can file a
takedown notice with your service provider.
Usually, I will contact you first however.
I struggle with it.
It is flattering that someone likes my work enough to copy it and put it
up on their page. Sometimes. I started writing for the web to see if I
could write in a way that people want to read, and this is how I find out that
apparently , yes I do. When I find blogs
filled with stolen work (including but not limited to mine) and massive amounts
of advertising on those blogs, I know someone is just out for a quick
buck. Not quite so flattering.
When I find my work on someone else’s blog and credited to
them, that’s a whole different story.
And when their clixsense stats show that they’ve made 100 times more off
it than I have, well that means war.
You see, when I’m writing on the web, on some sites (not
this one however) I get paid for it.
That payment comes from page views, ad-clicks and a whole lot of other
stuff that I don’t really understand. So
when someone rips off my article from one of those sites, they’re taking away
my potential to earn.
That may sound grasping and a bit greedy to you but consider
this. I found that working for other
people wasn’t working for me (pun intended).
I feel that women are expected to be men that look different. That we are supposed to carry on every day
and not need some time out when we have our periods – which is idiotic to say
the least. That we are supposed to just
send sick kids to school and not take all that time off.
However, while I make and grow a lot of things that most
people would buy, I still need money. I
can’t grow teabags or dish-washing liquid or laundry powder. I still need to pay a mortgage, pay for my
electricity and pay insurance. So I
still need a source of income. Writing
is something I enjoy, and writing about pagan-related concepts is a
passion. I thought I’d found a way to
make a little bit (and it is only a little bit) of money doing something I
enjoy and am passionate about. So it
hurts to have my meagre few cents a month stolen from me.
Anyway, back to the original point of this rant.
I’ve become extremely familiar with how copyright law works,
that an excerpt can be used under ‘fair use’ but not taking the whole
thing. So when I recently come across
someone explaining that ‘fair use’ means you can take anything you want from
the net as long as it’s credited and no one is making a profit from it, I’m
rightly a bit offended.
As it’s a common misconception, I was polite. I explained that this wasn’t true, that
depending on the license (it was a photo being discussed), you needed to
contact the copyright owner and ask for permission first. The response I got was interesting:
“Debbie, I'm 52 and been blogging
for years. Read this and then tell me I'm lying. http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
Not true my foot.”
Firstly, what was the point in
telling me his age? Does being 52
automatically make you an expert on copyright law?
Secondly, I followed the link. I read through the fact sheet on fair use of
copyrighted materials. Nowhere in there
did it back his theory of “credited and not for profit”. It said that they were factors that would be
taken into consideration, but it didn’t make the leap that he had.
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.”
Here is fair use, directly from
the source provided by this chap. It
also states:
The safest
course is 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, you should consider avoiding the use of
copyrighted material unless you are confident that the doctrine of fair use
would apply to the situation. The Copyright Office can neither determine
whether a particular use may be considered fair nor advise on possible
copyright violations. If there is any doubt, it is advisable to consult an
attorney.
Which was my
point. If you don’t need permission, why
would this be there?
I said to
him that his proof didn’t back him up at all, but apparently, because he’s been
blogging for years and uses photos all the time and never had a takedown
notice, that’s further proof – these people obviously actually know the law.
So now, not
getting caught is the same as doing it legally?
New Zealand
copyright law is more specific. And we
are in New Zealand.
“Fair dealing” exceptions
to infringement
A “fair dealing” with
copyright material does not infringe copyright if it is for the following
purposes:
• research or private study;
• criticism or review; or
• reporting current events.
I had a look
over his blog and found it fascinating.
There’s hardly an original piece on it.
There are entire news articles copied and pasted with random
interjections that say things like “Exactly!”
or a couple of sentences at the end expressing his opinion on the
subject. It is tempting to contact the
copyright holders of these works and ask if they were aware of this, but why
waste my time on him?
OOPS, it appears I had the wrong blog. I googled some more and found his name come up in many varied and interesting places before I actually found his own blog. This chap has issues, and copyright infringement is the least of them. Death threats to MPs and internet based vigilante-ism is more his line.
OOPS, it appears I had the wrong blog. I googled some more and found his name come up in many varied and interesting places before I actually found his own blog. This chap has issues, and copyright infringement is the least of them. Death threats to MPs and internet based vigilante-ism is more his line.
I thought
about it some more. If this was fair
use, then why is there varying degrees of licenses for photographs on the
internet? If you go to Google Images,
and click advanced search, you can filter by licence – the different licences
are:
Free to use
or share
Free to use
or share, even commercially
Free to use,
share or modify
Free to use,
share or modify, even commercially
If you filter by any of these
and a picture comes up, then you can use it.
If it doesn’t, then you need permission by the copyright holder. It’s not rocket science, and I would have
thought it’s quite clear but apparently it’s not. If it was fair use in any application that wasn't commercial, why would there be a distinction?
So all the blogs that don’t have
advertising and credit my work back to me are just fair use? If that was also the case, then why are the
takedown notices upheld?
But every now and then, you come
across a disclaimer on a web page like this:
If you have a look through the
rest of the website, you’ll find pages copied directly out of books and from
websites.
Please try and have some respect
for the copyright holders. We’re not all
complete money grubbing bastards. And
FFS, if you have a blog, write your own stuff. If you really need to share mine, a paragraph and a link will suffice.
No comments:
Post a Comment