These times

Lots of copyright-related news today.

Jack Valenti passed away.

Saw this in a number of mailing list and blogs, but Boing Boing has the update: Publisher Wiley threatened a blogger with legal action for reproducing some material from the Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. The director of publications at the Society of Chemical Industry, responsible for the journal, has decided not to pursue the matter. Cory Doctorow points out that the blogger’s use was a fair use, and wouldn’t require the permission that the director was granting. The other interesting thing to note, though, is that that particular society is headquartered in England, which has different fair use laws (fair dealing)- although I’m not sure if Wiley is. I wonder if international interpretations have played a role in this situation.

Also udpated on Boing Boing, popular link-site/community Fark had a new copyright policy that basically claimed ownership of whatever materials users submitted. Drew Curtis, creator of Fark responded that the policy was not what they wanted- they want a right to republish- and they’re changing it.

Slashdot reports two nonsurprises today- first, that the RIAA has won in court against UW Madison. Representatives from Wisconsin wanted a judge to oversee the John Doe subpeona and wouldn’t just hand the records over. The judge has acted. Second, the RIAA is challenging the Anderson v. RIAA counterclaims, which also isn’t terribly surprising.


  1. b Kurlek said,

    July 7, 2007 @ 2:31 am

    It is always a good question and area of discussion.
    What is copying , what is plagarism when it comes to blogs.
    If credit is given in many cases the original commenter in essence should be grateful. His views are being disseminated.
    In undergraduate terms many term paper and assignments that are termed “research” are little more than copying with a few footnotes thrown in to provide a measure of legitimacy.
    Many people discussion points are taken from alternative sources .
    In their talk they do not give credit either – whether it be from a literary journal or time magazine.
    Very good question and debate always.
    In the end if credit if given, due credit , it should not , in standard terms, be a major issue.

  2. arunava said,

    July 12, 2007 @ 1:29 am

    Yes its really a very good question an debate.

  3. Baby Girl said,

    July 12, 2007 @ 5:34 am

    Giving credit is nice, but people should ask the original author for permission to reproduce their work.

  4. Netizen said,

    July 26, 2007 @ 7:54 pm

    The Internet is packed with syndicated articles that are copied with the writer’s permission provided a link back to the original article is given. This is quite different that copying and giving a link back WITHOUT permission.

    I think an acceptable method is to quote using snippets less than 25% of the original work.

  5. Stategy Intelligence said,

    August 14, 2007 @ 7:07 pm

    It is always an interesting question.
    If a link is given back to the original source is that not credit.
    Indeed the link received in gives the website incoming links valuable for both traffic and google page ranking.
    A reward and recognition is being given for product / writing / artistry.
    It is not as if it is stolen out of thin air.
    Recognition and a reward is given.
    In the highest percentage of cases not of the readers of the reprint / relink would never come across the article in any way.
    The poster should be thanked and rewarded indeed.

  6. Global warming said,

    August 27, 2007 @ 4:38 pm

    Giving credit is nice, but people should ask the original author for permission to reproduce their work.

    dont see a problem if there is no financial gain

  7. bikram said,

    September 7, 2007 @ 7:39 pm

    Yes i agree people should ask permission from the author

  8. bikram said,

    September 7, 2007 @ 7:40 pm

    It has happened with me too somebody copy almost all articles from site without my permission

  9. SlackAlice said,

    October 4, 2007 @ 6:14 am

    Provided the blogger does not try and claim copyright and, credits the original author, I cannot see why anone would get upset. Plagiarism is a problem on the internet, but there is no point in producing something of value and then kicking off when others try and spread you message!

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI

Leave a Comment