Snautzer01
Honourably banned
- 40,141
- Mar 26, 2007
Besides if its legal or not, one does not go against the wishes of a valued member here. That is plain bad sport.
So be a pal and just dont. Thank you.
So be a pal and just dont. Thank you.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
And if 100 people do that then you have the whole book, or one person doing it 100 times. I can do sketches, how fast and how big do you want these Balkenkreuz?My whole point is this: if someone posts a 1-2 page excerpt from a factual book (of say 200+ pages) for non-profit, educational use which furthers public interest, it is highly likely that it falls entirely under Fair Use, and an American Court would side with the defendant and not the copyright claimant.
First of all, I would hope you would notify a transgressing member before you take any sort of legal action. Second, what do you consider a "section"? Would you sue someone for posting 2-3 sentences? In 30 years, would you really try to sue someone for posting a page of your book? I understand that you have very recently released your book and spent many thousands of dollars and hours and so it's a raw subject for you, but please do try to think of the underlying goal and motivations of it all..
To help you avoid getting prosecuted:
What Is Fair Use? Fair Dealing Copyright Explained.
"If the creator or owner has lost potential revenue through the re-use of their work, it is not likely to be fair."
You have asked someone to scan in images, obviously so you dont have to buy the book.
If the book were out of print, it would be different as obviously the author cannot lose revenue by doing so. However even then
"fair use" is entirely discretionary, has no absolute definitions and its really up to what mood the publisher is in to decide
if you get into trouble.
"No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, or by any means without prior permission in writing from the publisher"
If someone did the same thing here with my book - I will absolutely use legal means to have the images removed.
I hope that clears it up.
Its funny, I used to think people whining about copyright were miserable greedy old windbags, then I spent 5 years writing one
for a profit of about -£25,000 and amazingly now I understand what they were on about.
This is not a real concern for a variety of reasons:And if 100 people do that then you have the whole book, or one person doing it 100 times.
I find your wrongful generalizations of "ripping off" offensive and factually wrong. I have been nothing but respectful and conciliatory to you, I would prefer you reciprocate.The gall to talk about ripping off peoples work and to then come back and tell ME to re-exhamine MY motivations.
Where did I say that I wanted excerpts for someone other than myself? That is a wrongful inference on your part. I wanted information for my own personal research purposes. I did not do specifically ask for this in my earlier request, but believe me when I say that I would MUCH prefer people to not only post an excerpt, but rather to provide information and analyze and discuss it.You were on here talking about going and getting specific photos from a book for someone, so dont play coy pretenting you have ANY intentions
of "educational usage", your actions would in court, provably have by course of action stopped at least one person from buying a published
and copyrighted work. Under US law, you`d be stuffed;
Good luck with that!If someone on here who doesnt have my book, asks someone to go and
scan an image/page for them, and they do, its lawyers time. CLEAR?
This is not practical in every case for a variety of reasons which are obvious.The solution is IMMENSELY SIMPLE, without exception, you ASK THE AUTHOR FIRST, and you then do WHATEVER it is
they say, and thats IT. Adhering to that rule, prevents ANY possible legal issues, and keeps everyone happy. Authors
dont mind being asked anything, they DONT like finding out afterwards.
I have no idea why you're getting so emotional when neither you nor your book was ever in question. I have never said or done anything to antagonize you, but you appear to be blatantly hostile to me for no reason.Thats pissed me off so much I`m off for a glass of wine, signing out.
you appear to be blatantly hostile to me for no reason.
To help you avoid getting prosecuted:
What Is Fair Use? Fair Dealing Copyright Explained.
"If the creator or owner has lost potential revenue through the re-use of their work, it is not likely to be fair."
You have asked someone to scan in images, obviously so you dont have to buy the book.
If the book were out of print, it would be different as obviously the author cannot lose revenue by doing so. However even then
"fair use" is entirely discretionary, has no absolute definitions and its really up to what mood the publisher is in to decide
if you get into trouble.
"No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, or by any means without prior permission in writing from the publisher"
If someone did the same thing here with my book - I will absolutely use legal means to have the images removed.
I hope that clears it up.
Its funny, I used to think people whining about copyright were miserable greedy old windbags, then I spent 5 years writing one
for a profit of about -£25,000 and amazingly now I understand what they were on about.
Hi, just saw you replied.
There's a big difference between posting a page or two vs entire chapters. This also leaves out the counterargument that posting a page could actually increase sales since people have a small sample and idea of what the work is, and would have more motivation to buy it. Keep in mind as the copyright claimant it is up to you to prove that sales were harmed. This is no easy task because saying that a single person did not buy a book because of the excerpt is not necessarily enough. Courts weigh the extent to which the damage was "widespread":
"If the new work competes in a different market or the effect on the original work in the same market is negligible, courts generally find this factor in favor of the alleged infringer."
Captain Evan R. Seamone, The Limits of Fair Use in Military Scholarship: When, How, and from Whom to Request Permission to Use Copyrighted Works, Army Law., January 2010, at 16
"The fourth factor is "the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work." 17 U.S.C. § 107(4). The court looks to not only the market harm caused by the particular infringement, but also to whether, if the challenged use becomes widespread, it will adversely affect the potential market for the copyrighted work. Harper, 471 U.S. at 568, 105 S.Ct. 2218. This analysis requires a balancing of "the benefit the public will derive if the use is permitted and the personal gain the copyright owner will receive if the use is denied." MCA, Inc. v. Wilson, 677 F.2d 180, 183 (2d Cir.1981)."
Bill Graham Archives v. Dorling Kindersley Ltd., 448 F.3d 605 (2d Cir. 2006)
Because the whole point of this forum is educational; to share information with each other on extremely niche and hard to find topics. Much information is out of print, hard to find, and extremely expensive. Not everyone can afford to shell out $50-100 for a tidbit of information they could otherwise get from someone posting a paragraph-long excerpt from a book. This is one of the main reasons why Fair Use exists. Posting entire chapters or the whole book would of course not be legal and is not what I'm arguing for.
I am not "TRYING" to push the bounds of any rules, I am merely exercising the rights which Fair Use provides me.
First of all, I would hope you would notify a transgressing member before you take any sort of legal action. Second, what do you consider a "section"? Would you sue someone for posting 2-3 sentences? In 30 years, would you really try to sue someone for posting a page of your book? I understand that you have very recently released your book and spent many thousands of dollars and hours and so it's a raw subject for you, but please do try to think of the underlying goal and motivations of it all.
You conveniently left out all the rest of the categories which DO support what I'm saying.
"Fair use is a legal doctrine that promotes freedom of expression by permitting the unlicensed use of copyright-protected works in certain circumstances. Section 107 of the Copyright Act provides the statutory framework for determining whether something is a fair use and identifies certain types of uses—such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research—as examples of activities that may qualify as fair use".
My whole point is this: if someone posts a 1-2 page excerpt from a factual book (of say 200+ pages) for non-profit, educational use which furthers public interest, it is highly likely that it falls entirely under Fair Use, and an American Court would side with the defendant and not the copyright claimant.