Is it considered plagiarism if I am writing a fiction piece in creative writing for university, in which it is a story where the lines of a popular song is used as a dialogue? It's a fake conversation between a woman and popular singer in real life where the lines of her song are used for a conversation with the other woman. Would it be considered plagiarism, since all her lines are song lyrics from one of her popular songs? Even thoughit's not my intention to say her song lyrics are my words, I just want to convey that she is having a fake conversation with a famous singer through one of her most popular songs.
Legally: imagine that you published the novel, I liked the words you wrote in a chapter, and I copy-pasted the entire chapter into my own novel. That's how much each line of a song is worth. I've scoured the internet for public domain songs that I plan on using, but that won't help if you already have a specific (contemporary) song in mind. Artistically: when using lyrics in the text, you need to make sure that you're not interrupting the narrative with what's essentially an advertisement that the reader can skip over to get back to the actual story, and you need to make sure that the words feel right even to a reader who might not know the beat that they're "supposed" to hear the song in. Academically: your professor would probably say no.
I've always heard that using real song lyrics in a story is a huge no-no. You can use the title of the song but that's it, to stay on the safe side.
Hum... I've always thought that it's rather a quotation than a plagiarism. But it'd be safer if you make a reference/link to indicate where these lines come from. Thus, you make it an "official quote". And yeah, you shouldn't put a full text of the song as a quote
Used this way I think you could make a pretty good fair use argument, among other things, but safest to keep the number of lines used to a minimum.
If you accredit it, it's not plaigarism, it is however still potentially copyright violation depending on whether you can make an argument for fair use/fair dealing (etc it varies depending on where in the world you are). Also you can't copyright single words or short phrases so you are okay with using minor excerpts E.g I've got a bit where it just says "Springsteen came on the radio singing about being born in a dead man's town" It's doubtful that he can copyright the phrase 'born in a dead man's town,' but if I quoted a big chunk of born in the USA I'd be in violation, nor is he likely to sue for me simply saying that he was played on the radio as i'm not suggesting he endorses any particular view etc ( that said Bruce has the reputation of being a decent guy, and owning his own copyright for that album. There are other artists who I wouldn't even mention by name) a couple of lines later one of the MC's sings along, but he sings "had a brother at Qusan, fighting off the Taliban" - Parody is covered by fair use (the real lyric being "Had a brother at Khe Sanh, fighting off the Viet Cong") The other option is to pick something that's out of copyright ... general 70 years after the artists death. So If you quote shakespeare, or Kipling etc you are probably okay
If most any other poster said this I'd say, "No! It's fiction! No fair use!". But you know this stuff. I thought fiction, academic setting or not, would not support a fair use argument? (Well, since we're not talking about parody.)
There is quite a bit online about this topic. Here's a link to the Writers' Digest blog series. They are usually pretty reliable, as they are so focused on getting published. However, this article is from 2008. I notice there is a more recent Jane Friedman article from 2017. I'd do the research, and then err on the side of caution, if I were you. http://www.writersdigest.com/editor-blogs/questions-and-quandaries/legal-questions/can-i-use-song-lyrics-in-my-manuscript
Fair Use applies in fiction. People sometimes think it doesn't apply to commercial/for-profit works, but that's not true either. It's always a balancing test of four factors, and the type of work you are writing, whether it is commercial or not, &c., can impact whether those factors come out in your favor or not. No single factor is dispositive, however. The courts look at: 1. The nature and character of the work (this factor would include considerations like whether a work is fiction, or a newspaper article, or what have you, and whether your work is commercial or academic); 2. The nature of the work being taken from (i.e. is that work a work of fiction, or a news story, &c.); 3. The amount and substantiality of the portion taken (how much are you taking and how important is it to the work, are you taking the heart or core of the work. Of course, the shorter the original work the more this factor can work against you); and 4. The effect of your use on the potential market for the original work. Any judge or jury can weight those factors differently. And trends change over time--currently, courts place a lot of weight on the first factor and whether they consider your use of the original material to be "transformative." Because it is a factor test, and because different judges or juries might treat those factors differently, it's hard for a lawyer to tell you that something is, definitively, a fair use. You find out once a judge or jury renders a decision, and if you're sued for infringement and get to the point of a decision you'll likely have spent a lot of money.
Note, however, that just because the music industry says it doesn't make it true. What is true, however, is that entities like ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC tend to be litigious. I've dealt with all three of them. If they think you need permission even for a single line, the question is whether you want to spend the money to try to prove them wrong in court, or whether you'd rather just get permission or forget about using the line.
