# Is copying a dictionaries definition of a word on your website plagiarism? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 28, 2004, 9:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-copying-a-dictionaries-definition-of-a-word-on-your-website-plagiarism/226403 "2004-01-28T09:25:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![alterego](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/6bbea6/32.png) [@alterego](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alterego)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2004, 9:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-copying-a-dictionaries-definition-of-a-word-on-your-website-plagiarism/226403/1 "2004-01-28T09:25:50Z")
According to their [copyright notice](http://www.m-w.com/info/copyright.htm) I may not use any information contained on the [www.m-w.com](http://www.m-w.com) website without their written permission. I am not claiming to have invented the definition. Would it be plagiarism if I used [www.m-w.com](http://www.m-w.com)’s definition of ‘[alterego](http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=alterego)’ in my profile on my website? Would I have to give them credit for their writing? Can you copyright the definition of a word? I am asking them for permission as they outline I should, but I would also like to hear TSD on the matter. It seems as if they should be able to copyright the compilation of their dictionary as a whole, but perhaps not individual descriptions of words. Is it considered _their_ description of the word in the legal word? ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2004, 11:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-copying-a-dictionaries-definition-of-a-word-on-your-website-plagiarism/226403/2 "2004-01-28T11:00:34Z")
You don’t need permission to quote a small piece of a copyrighted work. As long as you supply a citation, you’re fine. Yes, you can copyright the definition of a word. ---
**Author:** ![alterego](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/6bbea6/32.png) [@alterego](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alterego)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2004, 11:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-copying-a-dictionaries-definition-of-a-word-on-your-website-plagiarism/226403/3 "2004-01-28T11:21:29Z")
Do you think simply making the copyrighted text a link to its source would suffice? ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2004, 11:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-copying-a-dictionaries-definition-of-a-word-on-your-website-plagiarism/226403/4 "2004-01-28T11:31:46Z")
No. You need to properly cite your sources for all copyrighted material. [Chicago citation guidelines](http://www.lib.ohio-state.edu/guides/chicagogd.html) [MLA citation guidelines](http://www.hcc.hawaii.edu/education/hcc/library/mlahcc.html) ---
**Author:** ![alterego](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/6bbea6/32.png) [@alterego](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alterego)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2004, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-copying-a-dictionaries-definition-of-a-word-on-your-website-plagiarism/226403/5 "2004-01-28T12:35:33Z")
> [@friedo](#): > > No. You need to properly cite your sources for all copyrighted material. > > [Chicago citation guidelines](http://www.lib.ohio-state.edu/guides/chicagogd.html) > > [MLA citation guidelines](http://www.hcc.hawaii.edu/education/hcc/library/mlahcc.html) I am aware of general copyright laws and am asking moreso in direct relation to dictionaries and whether or not the definitions of words can be copyrighted. I don’t see why it wouldn’t suffice legally if I provided a link to the material I was using. How could they say that I was trying to claim it as my own? Also, to my knowledge MLA citation is not legal (I took a class on it). As your link says they are simply recommended guidlines. I don’t have a teacher grading my weblog … ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2004, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-copying-a-dictionaries-definition-of-a-word-on-your-website-plagiarism/226403/6 "2004-01-28T17:12:47Z")
This is a Fair Use question and the legal guidelines for Fair Use are vague, contradictory, and/or nonexistent. The actual wording of a definition is certainly copyrightable. But if you actually compare dictionaries you will find remarkable similarities among them - mostly because they are all variations from a common ancestor. Unless you are copying the complete 20 pages for the 97 meanings of “get” or something similar, I would see no problem with copying a definition and giving the source. The simple truth is that it is hard to properly use a dictionary without quoting it. Your paraphrase might destroy the meaning. IANACopyright Attorney but I do have 30 years of experience as a professional author. ---
**Author:** ![Cliffy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cliffy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cliffy)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2004, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-copying-a-dictionaries-definition-of-a-word-on-your-website-plagiarism/226403/7 "2004-01-28T18:02:10Z")
Plagarism is when a person misappropriates someone else’s work as their own. Therefore, as long as you’re making obvious the fact that this is someone else’s definition, it’s not plagarism. Copyright infringement is something else altogether, and I agree with the consensus in the thread that there’s little danger in quoting this definition if you attribute it properly. That’s why this question: > [@alterego](#): > > I don’t see why it wouldn’t suffice legally if I provided a link to the material I was using. How could they say that I was trying to claim it as my own? doesn’t make any sense. The purpose of copyright is not only to prevent plagarism/misappropriation, it’s also to prevent _copying_ even with attribution. Fair Use allows such limited copying as you propose, but just because you’re not claiming something as your own doesn’t mean you’re not infringing a copyright. That’s why **xash** and **Dr. Matrix** always delete news articles – even when a link is provided and attribution is made. Plagarism and copyright-infringement aren’t coextensive. –Cliffy ---
**Author:** ![lawboy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c67d28/32.png) [@lawboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lawboy)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2004, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-copying-a-dictionaries-definition-of-a-word-on-your-website-plagiarism/226403/8 "2004-01-28T21:07:05Z")
**Cliffy** and **Exapno Mapcase** , combined, provide a good answer. While IAAL, I haven’t practiced much copyright (even though that’s what my firms says I do). Let me try to be brief: What I do remember is that despite Fair Use exceptions, the first part of the analysis is to determine if there is copyrightable material. This gets pretty vague, and given that it’s definitions we’re talking about here, the copyrightable aspect is pretty low. As already posted, the actual definition, i.e. it’s composition, word choice, etc., is about all that’s copyrightable. Next, using the case in **Faust** it then needs to be decided if there is an infringement. [ **Faust** is typically used in these situations given the fact that there is not much originality, creativity, etc. (the requirements used in determining whether something is copyrightable). So, basically, the analysis is that pretty much if you directly copy the definition you will be infringing, regardless of attribution. Providing a deep link (a little more in my realm of practice) can be pretty harry, too. However, if anything, you should meet with a cease and desist letter before openning yourself up to a law suit. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2004, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-copying-a-dictionaries-definition-of-a-word-on-your-website-plagiarism/226403/9 "2004-01-28T22:40:50Z")
There are two issues: plagiarism and copyright violation. If you properly attribute the definition to the source, they it isn’t plagiarism. As far as copyright violation, that hinges on whether a court would decide if it was fair use. One of the factors in making that determination is how much of the work is being copied. Since any one definition is only a tiny portion of the work, that gives you a legal justification. The other factors in determining fair use include the purpose of that use (in your case, putting on a web page for a noncommercial purpose would be in your favor), the nature of the work (since it is the nature of a dictionary to be quoted, and since definitions are pretty much the same, you’re on strong ground here), and if it hurts the copyright holder (not likely). So you’re in pretty good shape on any infringement suit. However, m-w has the money for lawyers and you probably don’t. If they sue, you will probably be best to settle to avoid the expense, even though there’s a good chance you’ll win.