s/he didn't!... read the original post... what s/he said was used is a 'firsthand account' [= non-fiction]... ...sorry, but that's utter nonsense, imo... probably 80% or more of all research that writers do comes from 'text' of one form or another... apples did refer to a 'real' person's account and there was nothing wrong with looking to that text for accurate info from one who'd experienced what apple wanted to depict... there was no plagiarism... and the whole thing was a 'hypothetical' anyway!... that means all that was referred to did NOT take place, but the poster was just making up a potential situation, to get feedback on whether it would be plagiarism, or not... so, why would you presume to critique [and pan] the examples, as if they were actual excerpts from a real piece of work?...
@Agreen: There are a lot of characters in my book whom I can attribute a quote to, but in the specific chapter it's for, there'd only be one character. I'll think about it.... @Amble: A few of those sound lovely . Thank you . @Mam: How do you suggest I find out if something someone said is still under copyright? Isn't that technically the job of an editor? Also, if a quote is on a quote site or in a quote dictionary, aren't they technically not under copyright?
you look up the work it came from... you can do that at the library of congress site: www.loc.gov no, it's yours, as the writer who wants to use it!... fyi, submitting work you may have plagiarized parts of will not win you any points with agents or editors... not necessarily... they could be there under the 'fair use' provision of the copyright law, since they're not being used in work that will be sold, but only listed for 'educational' purposes... when you use copyrighted material in your own work that you intend to sell, then it becomes plagiarism and is illegal/immoral/unethical... if the quote is something that was only said, not written by the originator, then it's usable without permission, but still has to have the source cited...
Ah, I see. Does the Library of Congress have contact info for the current copyright holders? And if what you said about "fair use" applies to the websites, then quotes from my dictionaries must be okay because I had to BUY the books that have them in there. Several quotes I got came from here: http://www.quoteland.com/. I'm not sure what that site's standing with the copyright is, but a lot of their quotes look like they're old enough to get around it. And they look like they have quotes for more than just educational purposes. Also, I know plagarism is bad, I don't like it either. I don't wanna be plagarizing, I just don't see how quoting something is plagarizing if you still give the source.
no, as that would be next to impossible for them to do, since people move around a lot and copyrights may change hands due to death and such... it's up to you to find that out, which isn't all that hard to do, with the internet at your disposal... why don't you just look up the 'fair use' clause yourself and see what it says can and cannot be done?... on www.copyright.gov you'll find all the info you need, on how long a copyright lasts... well, if you don't, i can't make you see what is obvious to me and to most... the point is that creative works belong to their creators and if you had created something that you made your living from, would you want others to be able to use it for free, without getting your permission?...
Well, no, but that would apply if I were to, say, copy and use the ENTIRE work the quote was from. But using just a small sentence? That sounds like a trivial thing to be upset about.
Allowable in review articles, scholarly papers, and other Fair Use circumstances, with proper attribution. Not allowable in fiction or other circumstances where Fair Use does not apply. Violate copyright law at your own substantial risk.
What are the legal issues relating to naming living people and passing negative judgment on them? In a novel can I hypothetically write something like “Paris Hilton is a whore” or “George Bush is a fool?’ What can I get away with? Does it make any difference if my derogatory remarks are placed within a frictional work rather than a serious critique? A second question; I saw a book on the shelves called ‘Barry Trotter’. It was a comical spoof based on ‘Harry Potter.’ How far can you push this kind of parody without being liable for plagiarism?
As for the first question, you're discussing libel wich is basically defamation of an individual (or possibly a group) through printed or written words, possibly pictures, or in any form other than by spoken words and/or gestures. I'm not sure anyone here is qualified to tell you the exact spot where you'd cross the line, especially if the entire context is not accurately included. Terry
Libel and plagiarism are not the same thing. Libel refers to slanderous written statements. Plagiarism is using someone else's writing as if it were your own. There are more potential "legal issues" relating to all-the-above than anyone could possibly know, in good part because many such matters unfold as they go, having a lot to do with who can afford the best legal counsel. Nobody usually cares about either unless there are dollars to be obtained in the outcome. So, if you're writing fiction, you should be fine as long as the work is your own and whatever references are made to contemporary figures are necessary to the storyline and the characters. No one's likely to publish it anyway if either problem is even suspected.
What are the legal issues relating to naming living people and passing negative judgment on them? ...you can't be jailed for it, but you can be sued... ...if it's only said in dialog, by a character, you'd probably be able to get away with it... if it's in the narrative, it could be a bit more chancy, but it all depends on the context, in either case... if a publisher was worried about it, they'd simply ask you to change or delete it... if you self-published, that's another story... ditto above... rule of thumb: when in doubt, DON'T! as far as the originator will let you!... fyi, rowling and her publishers have sued some, let others slide... it's not a risk many want to take, when up against a billionaire and her powerful publisher...
If the work is entirely a parody it is protected speech in the US. In the case of your "Barry Trotter" you would be making a parody based on the existing work. You'd need to label it as such, of course. Bear in mind that I am not a lawyer and my advice is not legal counsel. That said, there are sources that discuss Fair Use and Parody.
If people/writers weren't allowed to talk crap about celebs/political figures then most of the comedians/bloggers/writers/actors/other outspoken public figures would be in jail. lol
"If people/writers weren't allowed to talk crap about celebs/political figures then most of the comedians/bloggers/writers/actors/other outspoken public figures would be in jail." - my thoughts exactly. Still there must be a legal limit? Or maybe not...just depends if someone wants to attempt to sue or not, it seems... What are the legal issues relating to naming living people and passing negative judgment on them? ..you can't be jailed for it, but you can be sued... you mean in America only I assume? An Australian was recently jailed in Thailand for writing a paragraph knocking the crown prince in a book that sold only 7 copies...I guess the answer to my question depends on the country?
Yes, the law will vary from country to country. But if you plan to write about real people and corporate entities, you really should consult with a lawyer in your jusidiction, not a bunch of strangers with unknown backgrounds and credentils on a worldwide forum.
yes, i did mean in america and commonwealth countries... and i agree with cog... never take advice you get on a writing site [or any other] as gospel... when in doubt, dig up a consultation fee and check it out with an attorney who specializes in literary law...
I don't think you can sue someone for hurting their feelings. Maybe if the book somehow lead to the downfall of an entire empire or something..
Seriously, think about it. Every night on the late night talk shows hosts like Conan and Letterman rip on celebs in their monologues. Celebs/public figures are brutally made fun of in movies all the time. It happens ALL the time.
Celebrities put themselves in the public spotlight. That affects, to some extent, the liberties that can be taken with that image. But even that can be pushed too far. Really, be careful with your assumptions. If you are sued for libel, the burden of proof is upon you to prove the validity of what you write. The person you are alleged to defame does not have to prove that you lied. A good lawyer can turn your minor insult into devastating emotional impact, stress related disorders, loss of income, etc. It isn't worth the risk. If in doubt, scheck with a lawyer. If you have no doubts, reconsider the worst that could happen., abd check with a lawyer anyway.
They way (good) comedians get away with pseudo-slander is that they take something true (or at least probable) and turn that into an attack on the person (sometime humourously, sometimes not...). Actual libel/slander only occurs when the statement is false and defamatory...so, you could call ol' Dubya a fool and get away with it, but calling Miss Hilton a whore is, technically, a lie, and therefore, libel.
To win a defamtion lawsuit, the person suing would have to prove you cause them harm through you actions. Thus, if you said something that made them lose money, or suffered them in some other way that can be proven, they will win. It is a hard case though. Calling someone a name is not defamtion, unless by doing so you ruin thier character and cause them to lose business or harm. Maybe its different in context of writing, but I doubt it.
Yes this is true. Understand I was only thinking of saying things in a very lighthearted, obviously humorous way, as that is all I would ever consider doing. There is no one in this world I (or my characters)would ever say anything genuinely and personally hateful towards. Exactly. Exactly again- but there is also a matter of what's true and false, so I think it really does come down to what Arron said about it being false and defamatory. For example, in my book I say a lot of unfavorable things about the Chevron Texaco Corporations, mostly involving what they did in Ecuador. My book could get published and become well known and maybe some people would be turned off or even boycott Texaco because it brought this information to light for them. But is it slander? Could I be sued? No, because I'm only stating a true fact (along with the opinions of my characters of course). So something having truth behind it is everything, I think, otherwise we wouldn't have journalism at all. Another way of making a point about a public figure is to just make one up that is similar to a real person. Then you can do whatever the hell you want to them. Like in the movie Fast Food Nation.. it's a film with an agenda, and while the corporations involved in the film are made up, it's fairly clear to anyone watching what other major corporations are being referred to.
Thanks for the input. It is glaringly obvious that qualified lawyer would need to be consulted in relation to a specific concern, but prior to that, it is interesting note the broad sentiment among postesrs! It’s amazing what George Carlin got away with!
I'm doing a scene in a short where a few friends are together at a music store, and I was just wondering about the copyright laws with the following excerpt. To be honest, I don't think it needs any copyright, I'm actually promoting the artists work in itself if you think about it. "Danny gazed at an album cover that really struck his eye. He picked it up and noticed it was a single for Michael Jackson's old hit titled, "Thriller"." I honestly just typed this up but, you get the idea, it'll be along them lines. Thanks for the help if i get it.
