I know this has been discussed before, but I can't find the answer now. The way I understand it, on this site we are not allowed to have extensive quotes from poems, song lyrics, books, movie dialogue, and other such things. We are allowed to refer to those works and perhaps to a single line or two from the work. Otherwise, it is considered a copyright violation. Do I understand that correctly?
The way it was explained to me is that a brief mention (one or two lines) and author credit were acceptable, but that more than that is considered infringement.
I have stopped all references except the title and author for that reason. There may be a lawyer in the forum who can explain it better.
I find it sort of hypocritical that there are lyric websites that post complete lyrics yet here on a free story site we can't.
I find it sort of hypocritical that there are lyric websites that post complete lyrics yet here on a free story site we can't.
Those sites may be paying for licenses. Do you have a paid license for the lyrics of the song you want to include in your story?
Do you have a paid license for the lyrics of the song you want to include in your story?
No, it's actually a case of, did you write down those lyrics yourself when they were broadcast and shared - OR did you transpose those lyrics from the record / album yourself? If so - you're fine.
I know you're going to argue with me about this. Items that YOU write down as you listen to them are YOUR written and copyrighted material, even if what you were listening to is someone else's copyrighted material. I know that sounds fucked up, but that's also HOW all those free lyric websites legally exist without licensing a damned thing.
They post lyrics that are sent in by people who have listened to the song and transcribed them - and then have given THAT website permission to post what THEY wrote. That's why so many of them have corrections for song lyrics - they're not direct copies of the original lyrics AS ORGINALLY WRITTEN - they're transcriptions of the performance. They also don't have the actual sheet music, either. THAT would require licenses.
Now, for US to put those lyrics in a story - first off, the song TITLE may be trademarked, but it is NOT copyrightable. (I know, right?) Thus, you could use 'Fat Bottomed Girls' all you want, because the title to that Queen song is not subject to copyright, but saying, 'Fat Bottomed Girls, they make the rocking world go around' IS copyrighted. BUT it's also subject to fair use, which is how I can say it here. PLUS, that's not THE exact lyric - it's how I heard it.
Here's the thing, legally - you are allowed FAIR USE. Guess what? There's NO definition as to what FAIR USE is. Is it a single line? That's what record companies want - and may litigate over - but it's never been properly and legally defined. Could fair use be an entire song? You could argue that. And, even more fun, if you put in your work the DMCA notice, you can publish everything (well, not the sheet music, but the lyrics) to your hearts content, because now you are COMPLYING with the law. If they complain, then you simply pull the offending line(s) as required.
Please note I'm ONLY talking about lyrics in this post. Movie dialogue AS PERFORMED BY THE ACTOR is also covered under this portion of intellectual property law. Everything else - poems, books, and ESPECIALLY sheet music - is different. And yes, I agree that's a fucked up mess, but dealing with fucked up legal messes is something I enjoy. Hell, I deal with contracts every single day - welcome to being a REALTOR®. (Oh, that's a registered trademark, and I'm just as guilty as everyone else of misusing it at times, and no, there's no second 'A' in it. It's not realator or relator.)
If I understand you correctly, if you listen to singing and transcribe the words, it becomes your copyrighted property.
If you listen to a film and transcribe the actors' speech, it does not become your copyrighted property.
I detect a minor inconsistency there.
What about listening to an audiobook and transcribing the words? Do you own the copyright?
AJ
If I understand you correctly, if you listen to singing and transcribe the words, it becomes your copyrighted property.
If you listen to a film and transcribe the actors' speech, it does not become your copyrighted property.
You read that wrong. The transcription of an actor's dialogue is ALSO yours. That's why I said it's also covered under this - that's why you can have movie quote sites, too. So long as they (or you) are NOT posting the script directly, but the performance thereof, all good.
Audiobooks are covered under regular book laws, as THOSE are media to assist visually impaired people. If you transcribed an audiobook, you would still own the copyright to YOUR work - that's yours, no doubt about it. But you couldn't DO anything with it other than what you can legally as if you were quoting a dead tree novel.
Are the laws and applications thereof inconsistent so far as the medium is concerned? Yeah - even the IP attorney I consulted agrees with that. (Intellectual property, not Internet Protocol). So is the enforcement thereof.
The first important question in quoting another's work is: Is the item in the public domain?
In several of my works I quote the whole 4th Stanza of the poem 'For the Fallen' by Laurence Binyon. I can do this as it was covered by the UK copyright laws and he died in 1943 which placed the poem in the Public Domain in 1993.
Then there are works that were placed in the Public Domain by the author. Remember the copyright goes with the country it was first published in and their laws at the time. The US has some convoluted copyright laws and many copyrighted items were not renewed after their initial 28 years and became public domain at that time while others have been renewed and renewed. Thus the need to check on the copyright status if you want to quote more than a little bit of it.
If you know who is the copyright holder you can always ask them for permission.
In general most countries allow for 'Fair Use' which is not always well defined. However, many countries use the definition in the Berne Convention on Copyright that allows No more than 10% of the whole and no more than 10% of any one chapter as being Fair Use.
For copyrighted songs and poems the generally accepted rule is one whole verse or stanza as long as it doesn't violate the 10% rule, or couplets of lines from a verse or stanza.
In all cases the works should be properly attributed in each usage in fiction as you don't have notes at the bottom of each page and a Reference at the end of the story the way you do in an academic work.
There are stories out there that do violate the copyright laws with the amount of a current copyrighted work they include. They run the risk of legal action which can run from payments for perceived damages to total submission of the story, based on the country the case is heard in and what the courts do. The very least they risk is being labelled as a copyright thief and having doubt placed on the validity of all of their works as having stolen content.
On a related note, most Bible translations are under copyright. For example, Bibles published by Thomas Nelson (including NKJV, NCV, ICB, NET, The Voice, or The Expanded Bible translation) are under the following rules:
– No more than 500 verses quoted in total.
– Scripture does not make up more than 25% of the total text.
– Scripture does not account for an entire book of the Bible.
– Scripture is not quoted in a commentary or any other Biblical Reference work.
– All Scripture must be properly cited (see below).
– Your product is not listed below in the "Not Covered by Gratis Use" section.
And do NOT believe anyone who tells you that the KJV is not under copyright. It is, at least in the UK, and if you write/publish using it, you need to be aware of that.
See, for example: Rights and Permissions: KJV
There are limits imposed, similar to the above listed ones for Thomas Nelson.
And do NOT believe anyone who tells you that the KJV is not under copyright.
Way too old to be under live copyright in the US.
And way too old for a valid Bern Convention based copyright.
KJV was originally published in 1611. It predates any modern concept of copyright.
If it is subject to a live copyright in the UK, it's because the copyright is a very old royal decree based monopoly rather than anything based on modern copyright law.
Not sure if the US courts would recognize a foreign copyright that is based on "royal decree".
Way too old to be under live copyright in the US.
Which is why I said 'at least in the UK'. I've verified this with multiple sources. How that would apply in other countries is an open question, but the Crown Copyright has not expired in the UK.
Edited to add: This should expire in 2039, assuming the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 is not amended.
the Crown Copyright has not expired in the UK
Of course it hasn't. It's the King James Version - meaning the politically correct and approved BY the Crown version.
An able theologian, James ordered a new translation of the Bible which became known as the Authorised King James's Version of the Bible.
NKJV, NCV, ICB, NET, The Voice, or The Expanded Bible translation
re all modern versions and come under the relevant copyright of when they were written during the 20th century.
Rights and Permissions: KJV
Only apply within the UK, as you later state, for the rest of the world it is in the public domain.
How about T.S. Eliot?
Works first published in the UK would be Public Domain now, but works first published in the USA would require you to check the copyright status with his publishers.
but works first published in the USA would require you to check the copyright status with his publishers.
Not necessarily.
He died before the 1976 copyright act brought the US more in-line with the Bern Convention. The 1976 act did not retroactively change the terms of existing copyrights.
The 1996 copyright act (took affect in 1997) was retroactive, but only to still live copyrights.
The maximum term under the 1906 act was 56 years (2 28 year terms). So anything first published in the US before 1941 would be expired. Anything published in the US between 1941 and his death in 1965 may or may not be expired depending on whether or not the original copyright got renewed.