NOTICE: A serious reminder....copy and paste of articles

[mobiusptc]

i am sorry if this will be a stupid question but does that include quotes of famous people past or current politicians?
for example pasting and entire letter that Jefferson wrote, transcript of a video politician saying something dumb we found on you-tube, quoting a legal handbook or a manual of some kind(as is often done when disusing legality of torture)?

[Lee Kington]

i am sorry if this will be a stupid question but does that include quotes of famous people past or current politicians?

It can, depending on the source.

for example pasting and entire letter that Jefferson wrote,

Is most likely public domain therefore copyright does not apply.

transcript of a video politician saying something dumb we found on you-tube,

Again, that would depend on the base source. But, a full transcript should not be necessary. Select excerpts which you also discuss in specifics would be the permitted content to quote.

quoting a legal handbook or a manual of some kind(as is often done when disusing legality of torture)?

Quoting the entire book or manual ? NO !!! Using an excerpt, a brief one, as reference would be permitted.

[mobiusptc]

It can, depending on the source.

Is most likely public domain therefore copyright does not apply.

Again, that would depend on the base source. But, a full transcript should not be necessary. Select excerpts which you also discuss in specifics would be the permitted content to quote.

Quoting the entire book or manual ? NO !!! Using an excerpt, a brief one, as reference would be permitted.

he he i wouldn't post an entire manual ;p, thank you for your response.

[25mm]

I mod another board unrelated to politics. I think I can sum up Lee's words as it follows closely what we do there.

1. No more copy and paste of whole article. (We limit the copy and past to 2 paragraphs.

2. Post a link to anything you copy and paste.

3. No pay site info.


Does that accurately sum up the requirements?

[Lee Kington]

I mod another board unrelated to politics. I think I can sum up Lee's words as it follows closely what we do there.

1. No more copy and paste of whole article. (We limit the copy and past to 2 paragraphs.

2. Post a link to anything you copy and paste.

3. No pay site info.


Does that accurately sum up the requirements?

Ummmm..... NO. Some clarification / correction

1.We NEVER permitted cut & paste of entire articles here at Hannity. (Clarification)

1a. Be careful with paragraph constructed limits. Some sites define permitted fair-use of their material as 150 words or less.

1b. Regardless of the amount quoted what is quoted MUST be directly and specifically commented on in discussion. Any content not discussed cannot be imported and quoted under fair-use.

2. Post a link AND identify the source. LINK & Attribution

[skprtod914]

Aside from all of the legal issues being debated about paywalls consider this.

Quoted material and a link to that material which is behind a paywall is essentially invalid on its face. No one can read full context or really even verify the information without paying to do so. Hence, anyone who

1) Wants to violate their agreement with the owner of the paywalled site and

2) wants to steal material from there and post it here,

3) Also needs to post their valid credit card information so that anyone who wants to read full content and context can do so on that members dime.

Now they could just post their username and password for the paywall, in which case we will remove it and ban their account here for TOS violation.

Does this mean I can't quote old Limbaugh transcripts anymore? I've done that in the past, without providing a link because I knew other users weren't subscribers. I did credit the source, though.

[itsjoanne]

Ummmm..... NO. Some clarification / correction

1.We NEVER permitted cut & paste of entire articles here at Hannity. (Clarification)

1a. Be careful with paragraph constructed limits. Some sites define permitted fair-use of their material as 150 words or less.

1b. Regardless of the amount quoted what is quoted MUST be directly and specifically commented on in discussion. Any content not discussed cannot be imported and quoted under fair-use.

2. Post a link AND identify the source. LINK & Attribution

For clarification, Lee, when you say "Any content not discussed cannot be imported and quoted under fair-use"....... does this mean anyone else responding to the OP cannot quote further from the original article?

[Lee Kington]

For clarification, Lee, when you say "Any content not discussed cannot be imported and quoted under fair-use"....... does this mean anyone else responding to the OP cannot quote further from the original article?

Someone responding the OP can quote other material from the same source IF it is extremely limited and the content is specifically and directly discussed in the response post containing the new quote.

That said, if multiple posts end up importing a significant portion of the original source content then the cumulative amount may be grounds for removal.

[itsjoanne]

Someone responding the OP can quote other material from the same source IF it is extremely limited and the content is specifically and directly discussed in the response post containing the new quote.

That said, if multiple posts end up importing a significant portion of the original source content then the cumulative amount may be grounds for removal.

Ok thanks, I've read through this entire thread and think I understand it clearly now. It's important to know.

[25mm]

Ummmm..... NO. Some clarification / correction

1.We NEVER permitted cut & paste of entire articles here at pHannity. (Clarification)

1a. Be careful with paragraph constructed limits. Some sites define permitted fair-use of their material as 150 words or less.

1b. Regardless of the amount quoted what is quoted MUST be directly and specifically commented on in discussion. Any content not discussed cannot be imported and quoted under fair-use.

2. Post a link AND identify the source. LINK & Attribution

1. Never said it was.

1a. True, but who is going to count the words in every post containing copywriten material on Hannity?

1b. Not sure why anyone would copy and paste material that has bearing on the discussion, but i guess it would eliminate the strawmans.

2. Does a link that states www.foxnews.com/name of article count as attribution since the link states clearly where it is from?

[Lee Kington]

1a. True, but who is going to count the words in every post containing copywriten material on Hannity?

It is not necessary for every post ever written to be analyzed. Someone seeking violations of THEIR copyrights will do a search and investigate posts containing their material. Further, whether or not one could 'get away with' more is not relevant. Respecting law, respecting the legal rights of others, is paramount.

Regardless, I was only attempting to be helpful in regards to your two paragraph concept. Two long paragraphs from an article of paragraphs (2 long, and 3 short) would most likely be found in violation of fair-use boundary.

2. Does a link that states www.foxnews.com/name of article count as attribution since the link states clearly where it is from?

No. Here is why; this link....
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/08/13/fox-news-poll-percent-think-wrong-build-mosque-near-ground-zero/

will appear on the boards as

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/08/13...r-ground-zero/

[RickBulow1974]

What about a link to a blog article that is written by a member?

I ask as sometimes I post a few blog entries which might be worthy of discussion.