Newspaper article fair use

January 18, 2005 7:34 AM

Newspaper fair use. My children, in a story about their school, were recently featured (extensive quotes, several photos) on the front page of a large newspaper. To preserve this and prevent it from vanishing into the depths of their pay only archives I have mirrored the relevant page. I expect that this isn't entirely legal and was wondering how much of the article (if any) I can make available and stay within the 'fair use' guidelines?
posted by cedar to writing & language (12 comments total)

Technically, your mirroring of the article constitutes republication, so you're correct that you've wandered into copyright violation territory.

But, in practice, if you've done this on a non-commercial site (for instance a family weblog), chances are you'll never hear from the newspaper.

Have you tried asking for permission? I know for a fact that some newspapers will grant fee-free permission in such non-commercial situations.
posted by baltimore at 7:58 AM on January 18, 2005

Careful, this varies from newspaper to newspaper. I've dealt with the Vancouver Sun a few times, and they wanted money (about $100 cdn) for links to articles. This policy was in place when access to the entire site was free.

Another issue - after a while, the link to the article may be removed by the original host for a variety of reasons.

It is best to discuss this with the newspaper, to see how the article (and attribution) can be preserved on your site.

Finally, congratulations to your children for their first and extensive media appearance :)
posted by seawallrunner at 8:28 AM on January 18, 2005

Unfortunately, there's no clear answer along the lines of "you can copy two paragraphs, but not three" or anything like that. Fair use is largely decided on a case-by-case basis, and there's no formula to use to say "yes, this is fair use; no, that isn't."

However, there are four factors which courts consider in determining if a certain usage is fair use. The more of these factors there are which tip in your favor, the more likely a court would be to rule in your favor. The four factors are nicely described here.

Still, it sounds like it's not something worth going to court over, so even if a court were likely to find in your favor, a threat to sue by the paper might be enough to get you to take it down. One option you might consider would be to save a copy of the article only on your hard drive, but not mirror it out on the web. (This would still likely be illegal, but near-impossible for the paper to detect.)

IANAL.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 8:30 AM on January 18, 2005

If there were an easy rule like "you can copy two paragraphs," you can bet that the newspapers' lawyers would insist that all writers put each sentence into its own paragraph.

If you are content to keep a copy of the article on your hard drive, but not to re-publish it on the web, I think you would be relatively safe.
posted by profwhat at 8:42 AM on January 18, 2005

Did the paper have your permission to quote your -minor- children? If not, copy it as extensively as you like and toss the threat of lawsuit in their face if they complain. Not that it will be a problem (so long as you aren't making a profit).
posted by jmgorman at 9:11 AM on January 18, 2005

As far as I'm concerned, if a story is about you, or in this case your kids, you have a perfect moral right to copy it. The newspaper may not agree, and from a legal standpoint it's pretty iffy, but it'd be very bad PR to sue you for it, so the most they might do, if they notice, is ask you to take it down.
posted by kindall at 10:45 AM on January 18, 2005

[Having viewed the item in your blog...]

Clearly, you aren't enamoured of the journalistic quality exhibited in the piece featuring your kids. I'd hazard a guess that the school district ain't exactly on your side at this point, either (not that that matters, I guess). However, having signed a release prior to the item's creation, the rights issue is not likely to persuade a judge. Equally, their naivity in publishing too much info about your location harms their integrity and judgement, but is maybe not something that warrants even more publicity (tho' I'm glad to see the online version omits the pic, and the map).

So, on balance, I'd be inclined to keep a copy privately (certainly did when my kid was in the paper), in print & digitally, but not sure I'd want to mirror it for the world to see. What benefit can that bring? You could always end any interested friends & rellies a photocopy of the original, or an email attachment of the digital. Safer, and just as effective.
posted by dash_slot- at 10:57 AM on January 18, 2005

The worst that could happen is they'll make a demand that you take it down. And then you will. Seriously, don't worry about it. Been through dozens of those demands, and the satisfaction that they demand is that you stop doing what you're doing.

(Not a lawyer, blah blah, but I play one on the internet.)

Also, I'm confused: who exactly gave consent for photographs of your children to be published on the front page of a paper? The school board? Exactly what kind of release did you sign? That's highly odd -- I can't imagine a larger school being like, sure, come take pictures of our students for your front page! I'd be *pissed*.
posted by RJ Reynolds at 11:07 AM on January 18, 2005

Ditto RJ Reynolds... if you're not trying to profit from their story and images, the worst you'll see is a cease and desist letter. At that point, cease and desist and there'll be no more fuss.
posted by Zed_Lopez at 11:24 AM on January 18, 2005

Thanks.

I decided to pull the link to the mirrored copy and just link to the story -- it should be a week or so until it vanishes and I have copies, both digital and hard, for my personal use.

RJ Reynolds: at the beginning of the year I signed a generic release allowing for 'publicity'. In retrospect that wasn't a very good idea and I'll be pulling the release. I tried today but the principal was not in and the only teacher there said she didn't have access to those files.

dash_slot: to say the school is unhappy with me would be an understatment. Then again, that's not a new thing. I am a vocal proponent of closing the school entirely and view an entire school district devoted to three children as an absurd waste of resources.

kindall: that was my take on it. Maybe not the letter of the law but considering the shoddy journalism I expect it isn't something the paper would care to pursue.

Interestingly, I recieved an email from the managing editor which I will quote:

Thank you for bringing these issues to my attention. I am embarassed to admit that, based upon the points you make, the story lacked sufficient reporting, that there might be another side to this issue that we obviously failed to pursue. I will have a conversation with the reporter and editor and discuss what was lacking. Obviously, we need to do a better job of writing and reporting completely.

Judging from this email it's a wonder the story was even comprehensible.
posted by cedar at 12:59 PM on January 18, 2005

I just take a screen shot of anything that I want to save like that
posted by mabelcolby at 8:59 PM on January 18, 2005

When I want to keep a (private/non-copyright infringing) copy of an online article, I use Furl.
posted by achmorrison at 8:58 AM on January 19, 2005