a thought about copyrighted materials

by actage 34 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Robdar

    Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as use for scholarship or review. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test. The term "fair use" originated in the United States, but has been added to Israeli law as well; a similar principle, fair dealing, exists in some other common law jurisdictions. Civil law jurisdictions have other limitations and exceptions to copyright.

    The first factor is about whether the use in question helps fulfill the intention of copyright law to stimulate creativity for the enrichment of the general public, or whether it aims to only "supersede the objects" of the original for reasons of personal profit. To justify the use as fair, one must demonstrate how it either advances knowledge or the progress of the arts through the addition of something new. A key consideration is the extent to which the use is interpreted as transformative, as opposed to merely derivative.

    The third factor assesses the quantity or percentage of the original copyrighted work that has been imported into the new work. In general, the less that is used in relation to the whole, e.g., a few sentences of a text for a book review, the more likely that the sample will be considered fair use.

    The fourth factor measures the effect that the allegedly infringing use has had on the copyright owner's ability to exploit his original work. The court not only investigates whether the defendant's specific use of the work has significantly harmed the copyright owner's market, but also whether such uses in general, if widespread, would harm the potential market of the original. The burden of proof here rests on the defendant for commercial uses, but on the copyright owner for noncommercial uses.


    Go ahead, flunk me.

  • John Doe
    John Doe

    Fair use is a separate issue from plagiarising rob. Of note is that the words are not dispositive of whether plagiarising has occured. Plagiarising is:

    Main Entry: pla·gia·rize Pronunciation: \ ' pla-j?- ? riz also -je-?-\ Function: verb Inflected Form(s): pla·gia·rized; pla·gia·riz·ing Etymology: plagiary Date: 1716

    transitive verb: to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (another's production) without crediting the sourceintransitive verb: to commit literary theft : present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source

    So, you don't have to directly quote someone to plagiarize them, you just have to use their original idea without giving them credit.

    Some hard core people even hold that you can plagiarize yourself, as in if you write a paper for one class, and then reuse the paper for another class without the professor's permission.

  • Robdar

    You speak truth, JD. But I was responding to JeffT's comment that direct quote sources must always be cited, even if you use only one word.

  • JeffT

    Robdar, we may be talking about two different things. You are correct regarding copyright law and fair use. However in formal communication (such as a term paper) any material that is directly quoted must be footnoted. And a statement such as the example I put into my first post must also be footnoted. Failing to do so is plagarism, which is not necessarily a violation of law, but it's poor form at best. Again, see the source I cited.

    Additionally, inclusion of a footnote can be used as an affirmative defense in a copyright violation suit. "I did not steal the material, my notes state explicitly where I got it. It was cited as an example of false predictions by the WTBS."

  • Old Goat
    Old Goat

    Excellent examples of what footnotes and endnotes should be like are found on the TruthHistory blog. Go to http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/ and scroll down to the article "Foreign Language Fields within the United States." The author's endnotes are well done and to the point. Nothing pertinent is omitted.

    There are alternative ways of citing some material. Form is often dictated by the publisher or journal to which one submits their material. I require a fixed format from my students, but in practice there are several acceptable formats.

    A footnote for one word in quotation marks? There are occasions when one would do that. For instance, suppose we wrote:

    Rutherford was known to swear vociferously both in person and in his correspondence. His private letters to Peterson provide several examples. In five of these letters we find him using the vulgarity 'fargorfargarat,'[insert footnote here: Rutherford to Peterson June 1, 7, 12, 1922 and April 2 and May 4, 1941. John P. Peterson papers, Harvard University Library, Box 10.]”

    We attributed a singe word to Rutherford and such a bad word it is. Tisk. Now we must document the one word with our source, an archival collection found at Harvard. Of course, this is a contrived example, and I'm sure Rutherford never swore (too much) in his life. The point is that there are times when one word quotations should be documented.

    Plagiarism: A sin. Don’t do it. You’ll be caught. I’ll fail you and drop you from the course.

    Footnotes in proper form, but essentially fake: Assume others know the material as well as or better than you do. And, by God, do not cite something I wrote and claim it says something it does not. I’ll notice. I’ll shake my head at it, but I won’t find it funny. This is a sin. If there were a hell of fire, doing this would send you straight into it. Even if a reader doesn’t know the material you cite, someone will try to recreate your research. You’ll be caught.

    Rule of thumb: Many endnotes do not make a scholarly work. Any fool can write an endnote or footnote. Example the Watchtower’s Creation book.

Share this