who owns my words?
October 9, 2018 9:02 AM
I belong to an open internet forum about parenting. A childless guy just posted there to say that he is going to make a documentary about the struggles of parenting, and he would like our permission to use some of our posts in his documentary. He said that if we don't give him our permission, he will use our posts anyway, because they're all public property. Is it true that he doesn't need our permission?
Are there laws or court decisions about this stuff yet? If so, could you point me in the direction of some reading about it?
Are there laws or court decisions about this stuff yet? If so, could you point me in the direction of some reading about it?
I think he's dead wrong about your posts being public domain just because they're on a website, but copyright ownership of online content mostly comes down to whatever agreement you clicked through when you signed up. Lots of forums use these agreements to grant themselves copyright over your posts, others (like MetaFilter!) explicitly leave copyright for individual posts in the hands of the user. Your first stop should be the policy documents that govern the particular forum in question.
posted by contraption at 9:09 AM on October 9, 2018
posted by contraption at 9:09 AM on October 9, 2018
Oh yeah, to be clear, he's not right in saying that they are "public property." The copyright to them either belongs to the users or the forum itself depending on the terms of use. But Fair Use trumps copyright when it comes to quoting publicly available comments.
posted by 256 at 9:10 AM on October 9, 2018
posted by 256 at 9:10 AM on October 9, 2018
(Fair Use would depend on the details of how he's using your work.)
posted by contraption at 9:11 AM on October 9, 2018
posted by contraption at 9:11 AM on October 9, 2018
Your work is not "public property" because it is on the Internet. In most countries, you have copyright protection as soon as your words are in written form. It may or may not be fair use, or something similar in non-U.S. countries.
Even his use is fair use, you have privacy rights that may or may not apply. Having already posted this information in a public, open forum may make it harder to make that argument, though.
posted by grouse at 9:18 AM on October 9, 2018
Even his use is fair use, you have privacy rights that may or may not apply. Having already posted this information in a public, open forum may make it harder to make that argument, though.
posted by grouse at 9:18 AM on October 9, 2018
Also depends on the terms and conditions of the forum, for example when you post to Facebook you "you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free and worldwide licence to host, use, distribute, modify, run, copy, publicly perform or display, translate and create derivative works of your content" meaning if the forum had similar then they could transfer permission to the guy to use your post.
As above though, I think far more likely he means a fair use exemption
posted by JonB at 9:19 AM on October 9, 2018
As above though, I think far more likely he means a fair use exemption
posted by JonB at 9:19 AM on October 9, 2018
I think it's likely that Fair Use applies here, but he should be told by a moderator that using your words expressly without your permission and lurking on a parenting group as a childless single dude with the express purpose of harvesting your content for his eventual profit - under his real name! - is going to result in some intensely bad press for him as he seeks funding and when the documentary is released. Be sure to save screenshots of what he's said re: him knowing you don't give permission and his plans to use the info anyway.
posted by juniperesque at 9:20 AM on October 9, 2018
posted by juniperesque at 9:20 AM on October 9, 2018
Right. There are ways he could use your posts that would violate free use. But there is quite a lot of fair use leeway in something like quoting online posts in a documentary.
So the answer to the question "Is it true that he doesn't need our permission?" is yes.
posted by 256 at 9:22 AM on October 9, 2018
So the answer to the question "Is it true that he doesn't need our permission?" is yes.
posted by 256 at 9:22 AM on October 9, 2018
But Fair Use trumps copyright when it comes to quoting publicly available comments.
I am a fair use maximalist, but this kind of blanket statement is just not accurate. The fair use test is multi-factor and depends on the specific circumstances. Whether the comments were "publically available" or not has practically nothing to do with it, though it might have an effect on other causes of action. The circumstances here as we know them are likely to tip towards a finding of fair use because of the proposed use and its likely form, but it would really depend on the details.
(I don't know what it is about IP that drives so many people who are not lawyers to make such confident pronouncements on the state of the law, but...it doesn't help.)
posted by praemunire at 9:54 AM on October 9, 2018
I am a fair use maximalist, but this kind of blanket statement is just not accurate. The fair use test is multi-factor and depends on the specific circumstances. Whether the comments were "publically available" or not has practically nothing to do with it, though it might have an effect on other causes of action. The circumstances here as we know them are likely to tip towards a finding of fair use because of the proposed use and its likely form, but it would really depend on the details.
(I don't know what it is about IP that drives so many people who are not lawyers to make such confident pronouncements on the state of the law, but...it doesn't help.)
posted by praemunire at 9:54 AM on October 9, 2018
Not a lawyer, but my guess is he will find it quite difficult to get a movie made with the copyright of some of the content in doubt. There is a complicated, five (?) point test for fair use, it's incredibly dependent on the specific circumstances of the use, and in practice it's nearly impossible to tell, absent a court case, whether it applies. If the documentary comments on a single sentence, that's completely different from including multiple paragraphs. There are whole companies whose entire line of work is "rights clearance" and they run down and vet all the media that goes into the film.
posted by wnissen at 9:58 AM on October 9, 2018
posted by wnissen at 9:58 AM on October 9, 2018
Many many “marketing writer” courses SPECIFICALLY call his behavior out as the best way to get real content to sell.
posted by tilde at 10:20 AM on October 9, 2018
posted by tilde at 10:20 AM on October 9, 2018
The copyright to them either belongs to the users or the forum itself depending on the terms of use.
Exactly. There are a few things to check
- who owns the forum?
- what are the terms users agree to?
- how likely is the forum to make a big deal out of this?
- how likely are users to make a big deal out of this?
Fair Use is determined on a case by case basis. There are a lot of cases. We thought about this on MeFi a lot. The statement here that all posts' copyright are owned by the original poster is specifically to prevent this sort of "land grab."
You can poke around the Copyright office's Archive of Legislation to see what decided case law looks like (may want to search for words lie forum or fair use). I can also suggest some lawyers you could maybe toss a one-off question to if that would help. In short, he's wrong but just how wrong he is depends on a few things and somewhat on what a court of law decided. In short, I'd have the forum owner/moderator chime in. On many large scale forums, threatening the membres of a forum or acting against the interests of the forum could itself be a cause for a banning. Best of luck. DM me if you'd like a lawyer rec or two.
posted by jessamyn at 12:07 PM on October 9, 2018
Exactly. There are a few things to check
- who owns the forum?
- what are the terms users agree to?
- how likely is the forum to make a big deal out of this?
- how likely are users to make a big deal out of this?
Fair Use is determined on a case by case basis. There are a lot of cases. We thought about this on MeFi a lot. The statement here that all posts' copyright are owned by the original poster is specifically to prevent this sort of "land grab."
You can poke around the Copyright office's Archive of Legislation to see what decided case law looks like (may want to search for words lie forum or fair use). I can also suggest some lawyers you could maybe toss a one-off question to if that would help. In short, he's wrong but just how wrong he is depends on a few things and somewhat on what a court of law decided. In short, I'd have the forum owner/moderator chime in. On many large scale forums, threatening the membres of a forum or acting against the interests of the forum could itself be a cause for a banning. Best of luck. DM me if you'd like a lawyer rec or two.
posted by jessamyn at 12:07 PM on October 9, 2018
Even if he is legally entitled to use your comments under Fair Use, it sounds as though he does not understand the difference between "public property" and "copyrighted works that can be quoted under a Fair Use exemption," and it is not your job to educate him.
IANAL, but I would respond to him with something along the effect of, "Under Article 5 of the Berne Convention, as adopted into US law by the Berne Convention Adoption Act of 1988, all posts in this forum were copyrighted by their owners upon writing. As the legally recognized copyright holder of my work, I explicitly deny you permission to use anything I have written here or elsewhere. Further, I have set up a Google news alert for your project and will be tracking its progress. If I discover that you have used my writing at any stage in the funding, creation, or distribution of your documentary, I will use every legal means at my disposal to seek redress, including but not limited to seeking both punitive and compensatory damages. Other than that, I will not be engaging with you or responding to you further in any way. I wish you the best of luck."
Again, I'm not a lawyer, and the above is just something I wrote after spending a few minutes Googling copyright law. I doubt it has any more legal force than just saying "Buzz off, jerk." But it may be enough to scare off a guy who knows nothing about copyright and was hoping he could just bully you into signing over the rights to your work.
(There are people in this thread who unlike me have actual law training-- if they tell you my suggested post is a bad idea, listen to them instead of me!)
posted by yankeefog at 6:36 AM on October 10, 2018
IANAL, but I would respond to him with something along the effect of, "Under Article 5 of the Berne Convention, as adopted into US law by the Berne Convention Adoption Act of 1988, all posts in this forum were copyrighted by their owners upon writing. As the legally recognized copyright holder of my work, I explicitly deny you permission to use anything I have written here or elsewhere. Further, I have set up a Google news alert for your project and will be tracking its progress. If I discover that you have used my writing at any stage in the funding, creation, or distribution of your documentary, I will use every legal means at my disposal to seek redress, including but not limited to seeking both punitive and compensatory damages. Other than that, I will not be engaging with you or responding to you further in any way. I wish you the best of luck."
Again, I'm not a lawyer, and the above is just something I wrote after spending a few minutes Googling copyright law. I doubt it has any more legal force than just saying "Buzz off, jerk." But it may be enough to scare off a guy who knows nothing about copyright and was hoping he could just bully you into signing over the rights to your work.
(There are people in this thread who unlike me have actual law training-- if they tell you my suggested post is a bad idea, listen to them instead of me!)
posted by yankeefog at 6:36 AM on October 10, 2018
Threatening legal action opens you up to a declaratory judgment suit. Not that I expect one, but doing so is not zero-risk and I would think twice about doing it without getting real legal advice from a retained lawyer first.
posted by grouse at 9:23 AM on October 10, 2018
posted by grouse at 9:23 AM on October 10, 2018
All sorts of journalism and research (academic and otherwise) depends on being able to quote what people put online without needing their permission. Of course local laws vary, and it might matter if the person is using a lot of your content to make a product for commercial use. Overall, though, I think it's a fair expectation that what you post online can be quoted without authorization for a wide range of purposes.
posted by sindark at 4:23 PM on October 10, 2018
posted by sindark at 4:23 PM on October 10, 2018
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by 256 at 9:07 AM on October 9, 2018