Obtaining Permission

June 10, 2017 9:30 AM

I recently received permission from Warner Brothers to use a line from a classic cartoon in a book I am writing.

The language, from the legal office, is generic and looks like any of the professional referencing styles, such as MLA, for instance. Something I thought would be included which wasn't was, "Used with permission". Did I need permission if I assigned credit on my own? Is that the case with anything, as long as its fair use and/or given proper attribution?

posted by CollectiveMind to Law & Government (4 answers total)

Fair Use is not an easy determination to make. Where a court would draw the line for fair use and where a publisher would draw the same line for fair use are not necessarily the same place. Their errors and omissions insurers will generally require them to draw the line more narrowly than a court is likely to.

Attribution does not negate copyright in and of itself, but in some countries (the US is not one), may be required as an element of Fair Use / Fair Dealing exceptions.
posted by jacquilynne at 9:43 AM on June 10, 2017

Here is a pretty good discussion of fair use written Harvard university counsel for their own staff and students.
posted by metahawk at 3:46 PM on June 10, 2017 [1 favorite]

What's making you ask? That they aren't requiring you to say that it was "used with permission"? I'm a copyright lawyer, that omission wouldn't at all indicate to me that they didn't think you needed the permission you asked for.
posted by benbenson at 4:55 PM on June 10, 2017 [3 favorites]

Did I need permission if I assigned credit on my own? Is that the case with anything, as long as its fair use and/or given proper attribution?

Direct quote from the Harvard paper metahawk linked to:

"Can I avoid infringement by crediting the source?

No."

It's maybe best to think of the "fair use" parts of the US copyright laws as more a general outline of circumstances in which it might be legitimate to use portions of a copyrighted work, plus a relative handful of court cases that have established some precedents and refined or clarified certain situations (like Campbell vs. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., which established that a parody created for commercial money-making purposes could qualify as fair use.) It's not a clearly delineated and detailed set of laws and rules where if you find the right loophole you can bypass copyright by claiming "fair use." (Although a copyright/IP lawyer would probably be familiar enough with the established precedents to give you a pretty definitive "yes" or "no" about specific examples.)

Which is to say, in practice, besides a few well-established situations like quoting for the purpose of a review, "fair use" is more a possible defense if you get sued. So you were most likely smart to get permission, even if your usage might legitimately qualify as "fair use", because you would have to prove it in court.

"Copyright" is, y'know, literally "the right to copy", so giving attribution voluntarily is not the same as getting permission from the person/corporation who has the legal right to decide who gets to copy their work.
posted by soundguy99 at 11:16 PM on June 10, 2017