Proper way to post and source others content

[webmaster]

First of all let me say, that posting someone else's content in it's entirety without proper sourcing is illegal, there is no debate here, it is copyright infringement. If you didn't know that, you do now - so there should be NO posting of someone's entire article unless it comes with proper credit / sourcing and includes something of value added as well (Commentary, satire, etc)

But how do you properly give credit if you are referencing someone else's written or created work? (To support your blog post, not as your blog post)

I don't know, that is why I started this thread Here is what I know for sure, you must credit the original author by name: "Original author Morgan Carey" kind of thing.

We can debate polite or nice things to do in another post, I am talking legally here - we want to make sure everything we do here at REW is legal, so I think it is worth our time to investigate, and determine the laws regarding referencing somoene else's content in a blog or forum post. (We will make a rule for this once we get it figured out)

So how about it bloggers, what do you know FOR SURE is required by law when sourcing someone elses work verbatim?

[webmaster]

I like this quote: (Note I am sourcing it)

Always, Always, Always Give Credit Where Credit Is Due!
We deserve credit for our ideas and inventions. Even without laws and teachers' red pens, it would not be ethical to take credit for someone else's ideas. Citing sources serves several purposes, beyond avoiding academic penalties and/or lawsuits:



1. It gives credit to the originator of the idea,
2. It shows that you have done your research (you know what you're talking about),
3. It tells the reader where he or she can find your source if they want further information, and
4. It protects your own original words and ideas as well.

Originally posted by J Walker at : http://www.cas.usf.edu/english/walke.../ipdummie.html

[webmaster]

Note, that I gave credit by name, and provided a live link to the original source (And I did not take the entire article)

So did I do enough? What am I missing to be legal?
Did I do to much? Does the link have to be a live link? Sometimes we might not want to send PR away from our page, so could it just have been plain html and not a link? See where I am going with this?

[webmaster]

Another good quote

for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

Janice walker http://www.cas.usf.edu/english/walke...cyberprop.html

[judyo]

This is just an educated guess but I don't think a live link is necessary if you don't want to do that (nice for the other person, but I don't think necessary). IOW, typing in their link with spaces or not using www still gives them a page source, but I would think a name would be enough. Again, I have no proof so if someone can find some let us know.

[BrandonSternfield]

I treat it like citing a source for a term paper. You give people enough information, but you didn't have to give the dewey decimal number for the book. You gave the author, the title, and a little more info, so if someone wanted to find it, they could. I'd say with the internet being our source now a days, I'd say give a website, but not a live link.

You could even possibly just give a link to the main site. So for your last quote (janice walker) you could say posted at cas.usf.edu/english/walker/papers/ this would properly credit the author, AND show off their works to others. No draw back what so ever. In this case, you would provide the title of the article.

Hopefully that helped =/

[skipfactor]

>>posting someone else's content in it's entirety without proper sourcing is illegal, there is no debate here

My understanding is "enirety" requires permission. Three sentences max w/o permission & cite the source.

[kensmith]

You need permission to use someone else's work, sourcing it doesn't make it legal.

[webmaster]

Is that 3 sentences max a suggestion, or is it law? Here are my thoughts on the entirety thing:

Someone may have written 3 paragraphs (Lets say 800 words) and you may want to analyze their 3 paragraphs Paragraph by paragraph. You might love what they said, and want to explain why, or you might think everything they said was wrong (Again tear it apart line by line)

In this case, I think it is actually ok to post an entire article (Again with proper citation) without permission. Think about it this way, if you were going to rip someones article apart, do you think they would give you permission?

So I can imagine something like:

I just read an article by Morgan Carey of Real Estate Webmasters (posted here) and oh my god what a terrible article!

In this paragraph (insert here) he said something totally dumb

In this middle paragraph he was totally wrong because

In the final paragraph he showed that he has no idea what he is talking about.

Is this not acceptable? What if I want to comment on (Covered under fair use) ever sentence or paragraph of the article?

[webmaster]

Ken, I am not talking about "using" someone else's work, at least not in the sense that I think you are referring. I am talking about "Fair Use" which is under many circumstances perfectly legal and does not require the original authors permission.

I sourced a quote above

for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

Specific to blogging (As that is what we are addressing here) - all of those apply - we may want to criticize, applaud, comment on, report or teach using others works as reference.