Copyright and copy/paste - How much is too much?

[Bagindo]

I, along with many other posters, sometimes copy and paste text from online articles, particularly news, into our posts. I've noted a section in the Posting Guidelines regarding respecting the copyright of others (here), but what does that mean in practical terms?

I had a look at the Terms of Use of Fairfax media as an example and it states:

"...Except for the temporary copy held in your computer's cache and a single permanent copy for your personal reference, the material may not otherwise be used, stored, reproduced, published, altered or transmitted in any form or by any means in whole or part without our prior written approval or the written approval of our licensor.

In particular, you may not use any Material on the Fairfax Network to establish, maintain or provide, or assist in establishing, maintaining or providing your own publications, Internet site or other means of distribution..."

So I can't copy and paste anything from a Fairfax site and technically I just breached their copyright in cutting and pasting that text? How far does 'Fair Use' go?

[PhilippeD]

It kind of strange to use the wording "in particular" while wrting rule... Someone can interpret it as they don't care in particular of what have been said before.

[Bagindo]

Lol, yeah I get what you mean. Perhaps they were just drawing attention to the relatively modern cut n paste issue?

[atlantis]

I, along with many other posters, sometimes copy and paste text from online articles, particularly news, into our posts. I've noted a section in the Posting Guidelines regarding respecting the copyright of others (here), but what does that mean in practical terms?

As a matter of fact we (mods) won't raise an eyebrow if you copy/paste anything from a website as long as you provide a link to your source.
The particular part of the PG you pasted has been added after that wm received a complaint from some US based organism in charge of checking the respect of copyright concerning songs. To be honest, I don't remember exactly but at the times it seemed to me pretty awkward.

[Bagindo]

Cool thanks. The issue has been raised in a couple of other forums I read and it has been decided otherwise, not even the '10% rule' being considered legal. As long as it's not an issue here and I don't get my forums confused it's all good.

[atlantis]

as long as you provide a link to your source.

What I try to say is providing a link to your source, giving the name of the author if it is a research work...etc. To me it's a question of being intellectually honest and naming the source, the author, the name of a book or survey...etc.
In any debate, we will have to refer to things we have read or simply to things which are better said by people more knowledgeable or informed than us on a particular topic. If we would have to first ask permission to the authors and secure their agreement, I think that we would have no debate at all.

[El_Goretto]

Any respectable website will appreciate the free links and traffic so I wouldn't sweat it too much.

[Bagindo]

The alternative is just to post a link, and perhaps a few pertinent sentences, not post nothing at all.

Going to the extreme, if someone presents an entire news article and a link, it's not like every reader is going to click the link, the article has already been presented to them. Hence a potential reduction in traffic.

No problem, question asked and answered, carry on

[PhilippeD]

If my memory is good, google take in consideration the number of link to a content for decide the position in the result of a research.
Some people PAID for create link to there page for being able to show in the early page of the result of a research.

A website who would be too much strict about the spreading of it's content is somewhere shooting his own foot.

In same time it have some website who copy-paste content from anywhere and show them as THEIR work without link to original and even less name... This is simply disgusting!

[El_Goretto]

The alternative is just to post a link, and perhaps a few pertinent sentences, not post nothing at all.

Going to the extreme, if someone presents an entire news article and a link, it's not like every reader is going to click the link, the article has already been presented to them. Hence a potential reduction in traffic.

No problem, question asked and answered, carry on

To me, posting a whole article is bad taste: here, have this big block of text and figure out by yourself whether what I have to say is of any interest or not by reading this whole article written by someone else.

I think as a matter of respect for both the source and his/her readers, the poster who wants to share an article should share one or more excerpts of the article with a small summary of what it's about and a link to the original source.

[lantern]

To me, posting a whole article is bad taste: here, have this big block of text and figure out by yourself whether what I have to say is of any interest or not by reading this whole article written by someone else.

I think as a matter of respect for both the source and his/her readers, the poster who wants to share an article should share one or more excerpts of the article with a small summary of what it's about and a link to the original source.

A 'lazy' reader is more likely to skim the article if it's in front of them. Paragraphs are important in that respect. If reader is not interested then just keep on scrolling. Unfortunately I find that articles written by someone else are, a lot of the time, more interesting than what I have to say.

[El_Goretto]

A 'lazy' reader is more likely to skim the article if it's in front of them. Paragraphs are important in that respect. If reader is not interested then just keep on scrolling. Unfortunately I find that articles written by someone else are, a lot of the time, more interesting than what I have to say.

Yes, a good point too.

[ohmdafyd]

To me, posting a whole article is bad taste: here, have this big block of text and figure out by yourself whether what I have to say is of any interest or not by reading this whole article written by someone else.

I think as a matter of respect for both the source and his/her readers, the poster who wants to share an article should share one or more excerpts of the article with a small summary of what it's about and a link to the original source.

Fair comment though certainly not bad taste in my opinion.
Many won't bother to click on the link especially if it might actually challenge their way of 'thinking'

[ohmdafyd]

A 'lazy' reader is more likely to skim the article if it's in front of them. Paragraphs are important in that respect. If reader is not interested then just keep on scrolling. Unfortunately I find that articles written by someone else are, a lot of the time, more interesting than what I have to say.

Exactly!
{ I should finish reading the whole thread before posting eh!}