I have been writing off and on for 3 years on this book. It is a philosophical book similar to much of Friedrich Nietzsche’s or Aldous Huxley’s works. It conists of many maxims, aphorisms, and essays that i have written myself and are 100% original.
However, occasionaly i quote authors, such as Nietzsche, Huxley, Dostoevsky. I also quote many religious texts (since my book has a huge emphasis on religion) such as The Holy Bible, Tibetan Book Of The Dead, Qu’ran, Satanic Bible, etc.
What is the legality of me quoting dead authors or religious books? I have cited the author and the books, but didnt bother down writing page numbers down.
My main question is, is this something i have to worry about when i go to sell this and (hopefully) make a little money off of?
Not sure if it makes a difference, but no quote is over four sentences long.
If you get to the point of having this published, you better not trust the answers to this question to anonymous posters on a website. You just can’t afford to be wrong.
If you’re talking about cenuries old dead authors, you may have no worries, EXCEPT… I think translations can be copyrighted. I dunno – did Nietzsche originally publish in German? So maybe you’d be quoting from a much more recent translation.
I would guess that if you get a publisher to nibble, it will be informing you of what you need to do to cover its ass.
Chances are a lawyer specializing in copyright law will be along shortly, but until then I’ll toss in my two cents.
The KJV would be perfectly fine to quote with impunity, but modern translations of the Bible will be copyrighted to the translators. The same would hold true of the Tibetan Book of the Dead and the Qu’ran. Just because the copyright holder is dead doesn’t necessarily mean that the copyright has expired, either, though if you’re talking about something that was written and translated before this century, you’re safe.
Additionally, if you are not quoting a sizable portion* of the document in question and the quotation is for criticism, review, study, research, or reporting news, you’re also generally in the clear. The fact that you’d have a good defense if someone took you to court doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t seek permission if you can, though.
This varies based on the quote in question and the size of the original. A court decided four lines of a 32 line Kipling poem infringed copyright.
If the work was published before 1922, it’s public domain and there are no copyright issues in the US. Quote away.
Also, taking just a line or two (or four) easily fits into fair use and is unlikely to be a problem even if the work is copyrighted (as long as you’re not quoting song lyrics). You would need to cite them to avoid charges of plagiarism, but taking short quotes from copyright materials is exactly why there is fair use in the first place.
Right. If nobody could quote others in a book then no non-fiction books would ever be published.
Fair use does not have a definition in U.S. law. This serves to confuse everybody, but in practice means that unless you grossly violate common sense and decency nobody will bat an eye over illustrative quotations. (As Chuck correctly says, song lyrics are an exception, not because they are specifically protected by law but because courts have interpreted fair use so strictly.)
I’m a working author so I’m going on my experience rather than formal cites, but what you’re describing is simply not a problem. BTW, whether an author is dead or not makes no difference in law. The only concern is when the material was copyrighted, assuming it is in copyright. Anything published before Jan. 1, 1923 is assumed to be in the public domain,
If you’re instead reprinting entire chapters of books that’s a different story and you should stop now.
Unless you’re thinking of a different KJB than the one the rest of us are familiar with, it was published in the 17th century. That puts it in the public domain. You could reprint it in its entirety, as long as you used a pre-1923 copy to ensure that you didn’t incorporate someone else’s copyrighted corrections of typos or inserted commentary.
That’s still not the issue here, though, if only particular verses are being excerpted.
Of course, someone who thinks the word is “copywrited” probably shouldn’t be commenting on the subject in the first place.
I still am not sure about this whol deal about books written before 1923 being public domain. I know their copywrite has probably expired and everything, but still, why couldn’t i quote two lines from a Harry Potter book?
Well in that case, we can only hope the OP is American and exercises their 2nd Amendment rights, it’s the only defence.
Actually, I believe the general consensus is that you could with impunity. Fair use and all that, so if you properly source it, there shouldn’t be a problem.
Don’t quote me on that though.
You can. Just give proper attribution. Two lines would be covered as fair use.
Harry Potter is obviously under copyright. It’s just that books published in 1922 and before are in the public domain and you can quote as much as you want. Fair use lets you take small snippets of copyrighted works.
:smack: Yes, but some of us old people sometimes forget these things, and still use “last century” to mean the same as “almost a hundred years ago.” As others have said, 1922 and earlier is safe.
