June 16, 2008
Monday Manners: Fair Use
Although I frequently lament abuse of the English language, I'm also the first to admit that the internet has a language of its own. I'm not talking about L337, I'm not talking about LOL, and I'm not talking about the bad grammar that permeates most MySpace profiles. I'm referring to the language of hypertext, which makes it possible for us to write sentences like: "Don't be that guy" and "Her attitude toward adoption reminded us a little of a certain famous actress" without having to say what it is to be that guy "that guy" or who the "certain famous actress" is. When read aloud, such sentences make very little sense (unless you've got a PowerPoint presentation screening behind you). But online, not only do they make sense, they're becoming the status quo.
Alongside these more ephemeral hyperlinks, you'll find the straightforward: they still make more sense as links than they would as plain text or read aloud, but they serve to aid the content and/or context of the post they're in, rather than working as a punchline. You most often see this type of hyperlanguage in news posts. For instance: "According to Dan Gross at philly.com, Jocelyn Kirsch was spotted out and about in Ardmore," or "People Magazine tried to reach Kanye West's management for a statement on his tardiness at Bonaroo." And more to the point of this week's Monday Manners, this type of hyperlink will often be supplied before a direct quote from the source in question, as in: "If you think you've got it rough, think again: according to Reuters, 'A Singapore man with a penchant for sniffing women's armpits was sentenced to 14 years in jail and 18 strokes of the cane for molesting his victims, a local newspaper reported Friday.'" This last kind of link/quote combination falls under fair use which is, according to the Yale Library Licensing Digital Information page, "The right set forth in Section 107 of the United States Copyright Act, to use copyrighted materials for certain purposes, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research." This means, at least as I've always understood it, that it's okay to quote from other sources so long as it's for a valid reason and you credit them for your material. In other words, plagiarism sucks, but anything else is fair game, and therefore, fair use.
But as reported widely over the weekend, The Associated Press doesn't see it that way. And now they're asking The Drudge Retort to remove short (100 words or fewer) quotes from AP articles that were posted by readers for discussion purposes. And beyond that, they'll be defining how much of a quote is too much for them—limitations that could very well impinge on the rights of reporters and bloggers in the US and elsewhere.
The blogosphere is reacting strongly, doing everything from adopting a "You're Dead to Me" philosophy to calling for massive changes to the way The AP does its business. Here on Phillyist, we just thought it would be a good opportunity to remind you how to approach the internet, and all its vague rules, as politely as possible. Check out our suggestions after the jump.
| If you're quoting from another source... | DO: make sure you add a link to that source if at all possible. If it's a direct quote, make sure you at least credit the publication, if not the writer. Obviously, if you're quoting from print-only media, it will be a little difficult to add a hyperlink to the source, but the attribution should still be given, even if there's no link. | DON'T: just copy a paragraph of text verbatim and make it sound as if it's your own. |
| If you're using somebody else's photos... | DO: learn what all of the different Creative Commons licenses mean, and only use images whose permissions match your site. | DON'T: just pull the first image that shows up on your Google search. Unless you're using a book or album cover, chances are that the photo you lifted without regard to permissions does not fall under fair use, and you're leaving yourself open to some legal troubles. |
| If you're browsing the internet (or, you know, Googling yourself) and you find something that you've written quoted... | DO: make sure that you've been properly quoted and that there's a link to the original source. | DON'T: send a C&D order demanding that the quote be removed or the post unpublished. At least not at first. More flies with honey than vinegar and all that, so why don't you first try sending a polite request for attribution and/or a link? If that doesn't work, then you can think about busting out some legalese—but that should be a last measure, not a first. |
| If you've posted something incriminating on the internet and you see it on another website... | DO: remember that it's your fault the evidence got picked up. Nothing on the internet is ever truly private, but you can protect yourself by setting your Flickr, MySpace, and Facebook profiles to only allow your friends to see them, and you can turn embedding off on your YouTube videos so they can't be reposted. | DON'T: send a nasty request talking about invasion of your privacy or copyright infringement to the person who reposted the embarrassing or incriminating information you posted. A polite request is fine, but remember that unless you can prove somebody's infringing on your legal rights, "he's embarrassing me" isn't grounds for winning a lawsuit. |
| If you're questioning whether the material you're either re-posting or that you've seen re-posted is legal... | DO: learn the difference between plagiarism and fair use, and stick to it. | DON'T: make like The Associated Press and play fast and loose with federal law. |
Image Credit: Flickr user rochelle, et. al.
| 
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
