Copyright violation is akin to stealing money. Photo: Anna Cervova, publicdomainpictures.net, Public Domain Image
Over the past few years, I’ve encountered multiple instances of others republishing my work. Sometimes foreign companies republished SEO-friendly content overseas to avoid legal trouble. Most of the time, the person infringing on my copyright or that of the company I represent just did not understand the copyright rules. Here are some tips for bloggers looking to use content seen elsewhere:
- If you publish someone else’s photo without permission, you’re violating a copyright.
- If you republish several lines or more of someone’s text without permission, you’re in violation.
- Linking to the original content, keeping the original author’s name on the piece, or failing to publish the article in full does not exempt you from copyright rules.
- If it isn’t yours, don’t publish it.
- If you’re stealing someone’s idea directly, you are also in violation.
- If you are using a picture that includes usage terms and you ignore the terms, you are violating copyright law.
If you want to use a few lines of content and link to it, take a few minutes to contact the original author and ask permission. Freelance writers maintain their own blogs but also publish for bigger companies. This means that big (sometimes scary) companies as well as small businesses may own the writer’s content exclusively and it is up to the company to determine if and how you may republish any of it.
Why is this such a big deal? You have to understand a bit about how Google works. One example involves a costuming blog I kept some time ago. When I maintained it, I wrote an article about “True Blood” costumes. It indexed well in Google. Since a blog host was paying me for traffic, this meant that I was earning part of my living based on Google search traffic.
In this instance, another blog (a very popular blog monetizing on “True Blood” content) republished the first 200 words of my 250 word blog post. The blog owner included my name and put an inactive URL to the bottom of the post. She thought that she had not violated my copyright because she credited me and included a link, but in truth she was stealing money right out of my pocket because those Google searches went to her blog instead of mine.
Today I just received a Google Alert indicating that text from my LARP column had been used on an Etsy seller’s site. This is a bad move for a costume maker. Not only did she use my content, she used a photo from a business without permission. Aside from looking unprofessional, this costume maker has put herself in a difficult position. She supposedly makes money off of LARPers and people going to conventions. I help run a LARP-like game, write a national column on LARP and happen to be friends with someone who covers conventions nationally. In the case of this plagiarist, stealing from me was an unwise business move. I have spent years building up my brand and online/personal relationships with people in this hobby and related industries. Many of them trust my word. If I describe her actions, they likely won’t respect this person or buy from her.
When you violate copyright, you are essentially stealing out of someone’s pocket, usually that of a writer or a small business. If you ask a writer for permission, you will usually receive permission to use a sentence or two in your blog and link to the original post. It’s only legal and polite to ask. How would you like to receive a Google Alert with your work or product showing up on someone else’s page?
For more information on this topic, please check out the following sources:
- What is Plagiarism?
- Types of Plagiarism
- Please Don’t Violate My Copyright
- 10 Big Myths About Copyright Explained
- Internet Copyright Law
- How to Protect Your Work From Internet Copyright Violation
I ran into this issue myself a few years back, but it was in the scientific field. Back in the ’94, when Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 impacted Jupiter, I published a paper predicting the formation of a minor dust ring around Jupiter in a small science journal and then went on to other things. Around the turn of the century, a paper was published in a major journal that was, word for word, my paper with one exception. It was claiming that the ring formation had occurred, provided verification by the Galileo Spacecraft and the author then claimed this discovery for himself.
Needless to say, I was livid at this prospect and proceeded to pursue the proper legal remedies through the scientific community. After a very brief period in which my paper was verified to have been published years before this one. The alleged author withdrew his claim and vanished into the ether. Kaplah!!!
Now, will I make any money off of this issue? No… But that’s not the point. When others steal your work, one must stand up and say… bad kitty!!!! No kitty!!! My pot pie Kitty!!!!
So, the ‘Fair Use’ policy doesn’t exist in your world, does it?
In the scenario where someone posts a couple of quoted, attributed sentences and an equally attributed click-through-able advertising image, which linked back to your full article, I’d be interested to know where the problem is, exactly, especially in the scenario of someone praising what you’re doing, as an alternative to the equally legal possibility of critical commentary. Do ALL your images contain ‘not-to-be-used-without-permission’ captions? Do ALL your articles contain ‘none of the above may be quoted’ endnotes? Even then, Fair Use still applies….
James, I’m sorry you had to go through this, too–with a much bigger issue. I agree that authors must stand up for themselves!
When did I say that I did not believe in Fair Use? I think you are inferring things from my original post that simply are not there. In the example given, I mentioned that another blogger took paragraphs of my writing, not a line or two. I think there is a difference between posting a quoted sentence or summary of ideas with a link versus posting full paragraphs with a “read more” link to the original page. In this instance, while there was a link, there was no byline and the blogger re-posted it with my original title as well.
A quote or summary praising or criticizing with a link is one thing; a re-post of more than half of an article with the only credit to my name being a “read more” link does NOT indicate proper attribution. Plus, on the WordPress platform, if a post is made without attribution, the blogging platform actually indicates that the poster is the author in the default setting.
I love when people reference, critique, or praise my opinion on something if they do it properly.
If you look at the fair use policies, you’ll note that the blogger in my example does not qualify for fair use based on the four guidelines provided:
1) She used my writing for her financial gain (not nonprofit or educational)
2) The copyrighted work was originally created for the author (and the company employing her by contract) to profit
3) Most of the article was republished, not a few lines; this is “substantial”
4) Use affects market as Google will now divert the original poster’s traffic to the stealer’s post
Furthermore, the Copyright Office says that “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.”
If the author had quoted and attributed me as I’ve just done with the Copyright Office’s language, I would have instead thanked her for linking to my page.
Also, photos do not need to contain ‘not to be used without permission’ captions to be copyrighted. Unless a photo caption states public domain, it isn’t. The photo I am referring to was property of a business. I obtained permission to use it with credit and included that information in the caption. The content stealer used the image without the caption, so I am merely pointing out that she does not understand the nature of copyright law.
I’ll give you the point on photos, sure. And, if the scenario was exactly as you describe, then sure, in that case she’d be in the wrong. And I apologise if I implied any ignorance, willful or otherwise, on your behalf.
As I’m sure you’ve already guessed though, I’m an outside observer familiar with the situation in question. I don’t know you, but I do know the second author you’ve been having this issue with. I’m hesitant to comment here at all – it’s so easy for people to see sockpuppetry or a mass invasion of partisanship – but from my perspective you do seem to be exaggerating the extent to which your text was used. Like the author one of your previous comments, I too am a scientist, and we do try and remain objective and unbiased wherever possible, and failing that at least stick to pure facts. The site in question IS non-commercial (though yes, the author runs a separate business), and the quote was several sentences – hardly a case of an attempt to supersede the original article, or indeed of re-posting a substantial portion of it. I’m no expert on the default authorship settings for wordpress, true, and your point on that score appears valid, though your excessive reaction… well, it does appear excessive. Was there no scope for requesting edits? Does the fact that the article was removed in its entirety, and swiftly to boot, *really* merit such vitriol? Mistakes can be made by anyone [and I see errors on both sides here - I'm not privy to any other correspondence, but while you were in the right as far as the photo goes, I'm not seeing ANY high ground for the rest of it], but there are always gracious and mutually beneficial ways of addressing them.
What I’ve witnessed hasn’t been one of them.
I am sure the specific situation in question could have been handled with more tact on all sides, mine included. I did go back to leave a more respectful comment and then noted the content-stealer’s edited post, indicating that I “wigged out.” That did not encourage me to become more respectful by any stretch.
From the writer’s perspective, I ask you to understand the situation. I’ve been noticing this more frequently as I write more. Most of the time it isn’t intentional. I don’t think (in this case) that it was intentional, but before connecting a blog to a monetizing business, it’s a business owner’s responsibility to know the rules of the road. While I could have handled this better, I am glad that she learned this from me and not a big scary company that will send legal letters and lawsuits.
Aside from it being ‘more legal’ in terms of copyright, it’s also just polite to use a different title on a blog post and mention that the quoted text is from a different author or blog instead of posting it. Also, if there is duplicate content (particularly within the first few sentences), Google usually ‘punishes’ both sources, meaning my article and her site both rank lower because she neglected to post a unique title or introduction before linking to my article. I am sure it would have been nicer had I simply explained this, but in the past week I’ve had my content and personal image (photograph OF me) stolen by domestic and international corporations. A single person can claim ignorance, but a major company simply cannot.
I do not want to have a negative opinion of me going around in the costume world. I’ve also had to ‘call off the hounds’ so to speak when some friends and folks in the gaming/cosplay/LARP community threatened to spread some negative words about the person who took my content. As a gesture of professionalism and good faith, I’ve asked them not to tear apart this individual over a misunderstanding despite the fact that she has vowed to breed hatred over my name.
I still stand by what I have said in terms of fair use. After all, I’m going by the federally-posted guidelines.
Stuff that goes on the Internet (and particularly here on my business site) stays cached forever. I’d rather continue with a professional attitude. Instead of continuing the bickering, I chose to write this post and educate others about copyright. Also, if someone wants to quote my article or reprint part of it, they will hopefully find this post and contact me regarding use. I usually say yes!
In the future, I have decided not to contact owners who are using content in this manner unless I wholeheartedly own the content. It might have been more effective had Examiner.com handled this situation by sending the cease and desist letter.
Here is another resource for anyone interested in this topic:
Putting a Copyright Infringer Out of Business, by Angela Hoy at WritersWeekly.com: http://writersweekly.com/the_latest_from_angelahoycom/006066_05262010.html
Angela is diligent about posting on publishing scams and copyright ripper-offers (and how to deal with them). She also publishes a thorough list of freelance writing job leads each week. Hope you find this helpful!
Sorry, Monica, I have no idea.