Torchwoodgate

[tamaranth]

Further to this morning's post about whether it is Right / Ethical / Legal for an author of a published, dead-tree book to quote extensively (up to 400 words at a time) from LJ posts, attributing them to the authors but not contacting said authors ...

- Selected extracts from author's response to complaints. Includes the priceless comment "I read out [author's] reply at work. The sound you hear if you listen carefully is a room full of high priced lawyers dissolving into hysterics."

- Daily Mail paid a blogger for using his material under similar circumstances -- but only after he invoiced them. Some interesting legal points there.

Comments

[swisstone.livejournal.com]

Hmm. I'm not sure this is as clear-cut a case as most of the LJers who've commented on the original community post seem to think. Perhaps Walker has quoted at excessive length - I'd have to look inside a copy of the book concerned. But I've seen an awful lot of climbing on some very high horses, once again displaying the ability of online communities to collectively go off on one rather than taking a more reasonable approach. So I have seen Walker accused of lazy writing (only true if these quotations made up the bulk of the book, which is clearly not the case), the material dismissed as 'filler' (no, it's there to give a rounded view of how fans in general have reacted to particular episodes, rather than it just being Walker's opinion, something for which he's been praised in the past), it suggested that he should have asked for permission before quoting from published sources (sorry, I don't think the non-fiction business works like that), that it's immoral for him to be profiting from other people's words in this way (as if these books are actually going to make him enough to live off), that he could have sent everyone quoted a free copy (have these people any idea how non-fiction publishing works?), and that Walker is arrogant because of the way he's responded to the complaints (i.e. he hasn't grovelled to the world of LJ saying how wrong he was and he's now seen the light).

The only serious charge, as far as I can see, that can be laid against Walker is that what he quoted violates fair use. And that's a tricky question that varies from case to case (it's certainly not just 300 words of quotation per volume in toto), and it may well be that Walker hasn't broken that. The assertions that what Walker has done is intrinsically immoral and violates copyright law are going too far, and you can't hand-wave away fair use whilst trying to insist on the protections afforded by copyright, unless you want the BBC to exercise its copyright to stop you talking about Torchwood in the first place.

I don't think the Mail on Sunday case is entirely comparable, as those blog posts were quoted in their entirety. I think that makes a difference.

But I'm not an expert on this, and it would be interesting to see what surliminal or major_clanger have to say.

[tamaranth.livejournal.com]

There are certainly some rather extreme viewpoints on the original post and on subsequent discussions. But I don't think it unreasonable to drop people an email (or a comment, perhaps while copying and pasting the posts) to indicate that their work is to be republished elsewhere -- and I am uncomfortable that large chunks of 'fan reviews' (up to 400 words at a time, according to a spot check by major_clanger) have been included in, and may make up as much as a third of, a work which it's hard to define as academic criticism.

As for violating copyright, The author retains all patent, trademark, and copyright to all Content posted within available fields, and is responsible for protecting those rights (http://www.livejournal.com/legal/tos.bml) -- that's LiveJournal's Terms Of Service.

I'm not really qualified to pontificate on this -- haven't seen the book, and haven't had reviews used in such a way -- but I know I'd be mightily annoyed if my book reviews were reproduced without my knowledge and consent. And I do think I'd have a case for breach of copyright.

[tamaranth.livejournal.com]

re your edit: I really don't know if anybody's reviews have been quoted in their entirety. Perhaps the LJers affected will indicate whether this is the case.

[major-clanger.livejournal.com]

I've just been checking the pages I snapped pictures of against the original posts. Most are large chunks (a third to a half) but I've found at least one - at the bottom of this page (http://www.torchwoodguide.co.uk/guide/207.html) - which is reprinted start to finish with about 1/4 excised from the middle.

The average length seems to be 200-300 words or so, which is hard to sustain as any sort of fair dealing given that the original posts are around 1000 words or so.

[swisstone.livejournal.com]

I don't think that Walker has ever claimed that the LJ posts concerned are not protected by copyright (which is what the Mail on Sunday did claim); he's arguing that his use of that copyrighted material is protected under fair use (and I don't believe that is affected by the fact that this is a popular book rather than a work of academic criticism). Now, MC seems to feel that Walker has gone beyond fair use, and I'm happy to accept his view on this - he's done the research, and knows the laws. But I think it's important to address what Walker has done on that issue and on that issue alone. Unless I'm wrong about UK copyright law, whilst it might have been nice if Walker had contacted the people whose reviews he quoted from, he is under no legal or moral obligation to do so merely for the act of quoting,* only if that quotation goes beyond fair use.

* Though Walker may be being a prat by suggesting that had he asked permission, it would imply that he did have such an obligation - on the other hand, if you do ask permission then you have a moral obligation to respect the answer you get, so perhaps he felt it was easier to avoid that issue.

[tamaranth.livejournal.com]

I'd agree, I think, that there is no legal obligation to ask permission to quote (setting aside the issue of %age of original quoted). I suspect I'm extrapolating from my own experience: I've been asked twice to confirm that I was willing for a blog post to appear in a Real Published Book. (I've also had very brief excerpts from blog posts printed in a magazine, without permission being asked; only came across them by chance; would have liked to be told, and would have kicked up a fuss if the excerpts had been substantive.)

I think we'd better leave morals out of this! (Because yes, I do feel that quoting at length from someone else's writing incurs a responsibility to, at the very least, inform them; ideally, to ask first.)