Publishing Articles to Newsvine

Calvin, thank you for spelling this out more clearly....I'm sick of people posting stuff that is not original and left for others to believe they are....do people think we are stupid. Those should be embarrassed not to know the difference...(I say that about those that "do" know the difference), respectfully, Hek:)

Calvin,

You don't mind me asking you if that is your real picture next to your name? Smile.

The author of the original content would have to submit a DMCA takedown notice to Newsvine.

The policy and the process is outlined here.

Thanks!

Yes, I get that, I just liked the black and white examples/explanation. Sometimes that makes it clearer a/o cements in the brain for people. Okay, me. I'm getting old. Or feeling it anyway. :0(

Calvin

Here is a question. From time to time, I publish original articles on a space themed and related website. The demographics and viewership is completely orthogonal to Newsvine. I retain the copyrights to my material and am not paid in the other venue.

Do you have a problem with me publishing these articles here as well on my site?

Thanks

It's my understanding that's been covered by the CoH for about as long as there's been a CoH:

Posting full articles (using the "Write Article" feature) that also appear on your blog or web site is acceptable but seeding your own stuff is not.

So, you're talking about fair use exemptions to copyright laws or instances in which the author of an article specifically extends permission for the content to be reproduced, right?

The trouble is, Newsvine offers two systems:

1) If something falls into the above category, and you want to feature something that someone else wrote, you can seed the content to your column. If someone from another website has written an article and they want it to be spread across the internet, this is the option that Newsvine offers for doing so. It's really the only option Newsvine offers.

2) Or, you can write your own content. The "write article" option does not allow for "copying and pasting" other people's articles, even *if* you have a fair use exemption, or permission to do so. Even though you have permission from the source, you're still breaking a Newsvine rule.

Calvin touches on the reason why this rule is in place when he says that doing so would be unfair to those who actually do take the time to write their own content, because something that takes you no time at all "copy/paste" may use up a "featured" slot on the front page, at the expense of someone who actually did take the time to write an article.

O.K. I understand. Thank you.

I'm obviously not Calvin, but here is what I think he'll say:

(I went to your column and read the article in question.)

You're within the guidelines because you posted the contents of the article in blockquotes, the author of the letter specifically gave permission to reproduce and *most importantly* because you offered your own analysis of the situation.

In short, you used the letter as a jumping off point to write your own article. I did something similar after reading something in the Newspaper - an open letter from one of the local Ford dealerships.

The problem Calvin is talking about is people who copy and paste an email and publish it as an article while only saying:

"Ha! I got this this morning and thought it was funny/scary/important, so I thought I'd share it here."

Tom, I read that way back when. If people consider the rules and laws that apply to print material, and apply them here--there really should be very little to worry about. IMO, you went out of your way to give credit where credit was due. Even though the article was not on the web, you gave credit to the original author and publication and date. You also provided a visual scan of the original--which, to me, is above the necessary requirements. I guess we are becoming a society that doesn't learn the rules/definition of what plagiarism is. It's okay to share others' work, just be sure that you credit them and seek permission when necessary.

Calvin,

Just curious, but what if the original material is taken out of context (assuming on purpose) by the author of the article?

Also how far does it go? For example, a long comment (say over two or three hundred words). A comment is written by the individual. What if that is taken out of context for an article, because only chosen parts are used? I realize that is unethical, but how far does the copy right go?

Isn't it against the spirit of Newsvine?

I would be interested in the answer to this question, too.

Just curious, but what if the original material is taken out of context (assuming on purpose) by the author of the article?

If the person sources the excerpt properly (with a link to the source) it doesn't matter if they take it out of context. You can go to the source, and call them out on it, if they did. Then, they either answer to why they did so, or they lose credibility.

If they're not sourcing it properly, the problem isn't that it's taken out of context, it's that they're not sourcing properly, which they should be doing.

Though, in my experience, if someone doesn't link an excerpt to the original source, it's probably *because* they're taking something out of context, and don't want people to know it. So, when you see that, ask them to provide a link to the source, and if they refuse, tell them that you simply won't accept their argument as valid until they do.

Fair use allows for the publication of excerpts for critical or educational purposes.

It's not a copyright infringement provided the person doesn't publish the whole thing.

it doesn't matter if they take it out of context.

While I generally agree with Brian Ford on copyright things, I respectfully disagree with him on the above quote from his comment #16.6.

If a person deliberately quotes something out of context without acknowledging it, I consider that a violation of the spirit if not the letter of the copyright law. However, I am not a lawyer and cannot give legal advice.

And I think Calvin Tang makes an excellent point in comment #16.8 about the difficulties of deciding "every use case in advance."

Great question Perrie!

I know in school you have limitations on length of time and/or number of words, in a movie or song, before you have to either have express written permission or buy the rights to share a piece of work with a group of people.

My thoughts are that you should always try to give credit, when possible--just to be on the safe side. I will be interested to know what Newsvine declares as LAW.

I often quote lyrics myself, but feel I'm overdoing "credits" sometimes, and would like to get a sense of where the line is.

Good example, many use the phrase "times they are a-changin'" which is technically Bob Dylan quote, but it's almost subliminal in our culture that this is assumed by its overuse.

#17.3

to be clear----that was a question, if anyone has advice for me.

Using one line that has become an accepted figure of speech is fine. You're not actually quoting the song itself.

If you were, you would then need to provide attribution.

You could clip it, but easier way is to just "select" the group(s) you want to post it too... like one of your own for example before you 'Publish the article'. Then it will automatically pop up in your group.

clipping overrides the natural chronological order of content within groups.

Regarding the above quote from Calvin Tang's comment #18.2:

I have at times clipped articles hours or days after they were seeded, due to forgetting to (or in the case of articles of others, not reading them until later).

The articles still appeared in their correct "chronological order" based on the date and time of seeding, not the clipping.

Since this is perhaps a bit off topic, I apologize for the digression.

You always could go 'edit' your article at anytime and select the extra groups as well.

speaking of which what's the status of the revised faq?

ok, thanks. i've offered repeatedly to help with it - just pass that on to the right people ok

Good Point. Steve I have wondered about this.

Even if one finds it on a 'free' clipart site, credit should be noted. (Unless you are Shepard Fairey.)

I think the Shepard Fairey case is intriguing, and I wish he hadn't made the boneheaded mistake of lying, because I think it would have been an interesting fair use case.

Even if one finds it on a 'free' clipart site, credit should be noted.

Well, that really depends. Some creative commons licenses don't require that. It's really up to the copyright holder.

But, I think the best thing to do when using pictures is, when in doubt: Use one of your own photos, or illustrations, or use Newvine's Flickr feature, which only uses content with permission and automatically sources the content.

I have seen a lot of articles cropping up lately which are something of a variation on the poll trend: Here's 50 "funny" pictures I found on the internet, lets gab about them. It's hard to rain on that parade, because everyone accuses you of being too serious or a netcop, but it really shouldn't be allowed.

Well, that really depends. Some creative commons licenses don't require that. It's really up to the copyright holder.

Of course.

I'm thinking of a particular contribution with a mess of Jesus pictures that came from a churchy site. (Somehow... that equated to 'spreading the gospel', I guess.) Contained therein were some pretty well-known illustrations with no credit.

I think there was a recent effort also to set up a pool of photos so that newsviners can use those to avoid the copyright issues.

http://www.virtualsalt.com/mla.htm

If you're citing a website, the easiest thing to do is just put a link to the source, right after the excerpt. I usually just type out SOURCE and make that the link.

(The above link is to the MLA guidelines for sourcing web content, but it's really more for offline papers.)

Yes I agree. I was wondering if there was a way I could save it for referencing in the future

You can "clip" articles to your column. (Either as a public or private clipping.) To do so, you use the "clip to" button at the top of the article.

Thanks, Brian--

If I do this (clip to my page) will it still continue to track comments? I'm getting some useful info from the questions and answers and would like to continue following them.

Your comment tracker should track comments for pretty much forever, unless you tell it to stop, whether you clip it or not.

Plus you can always bookmark it