Self Esteem - Mod note

[picker]

Baaaaaa!

[capybara]

RAHHRR!
[froth]
NIP NIP NIP NIP. . .

[ltfire]

@C K Dexter Haven

Answer: if YOU wrote the parody, then you have full rights to it and can post it. If someone else (say, Weird Al Y) wrote the parody, then NO.

And even if you use just a snippet, you should provide full attribution.

The Straight Dope Message Boards are sponsored by the CHICAGO READER. The READER is extremely fussy about copyrights – more so than might be strictly necessary, from a technical legal point of view. It’s basically the golden rule: the READER doesn’t want anyone copying their material, and therefore we don’t allow people on the READER’s Message Boards to copy the material of others.

No, you could not. At least, not from us. You could go to a law library and look up the hundreds of pages of legal cases, if you wanted. The general “fair use” rule is something like five percent. That’s obviously targetted at longer works, like stories, rather than a three-stanza song, but the idea is: How much? Not much.

A couple of lines is fine, and then provide a link to the website that DOES have the legitimate copyright to reproduce the entire song.

Ahhh…but how will we know that the website we refer to really has the copyright to that particular song? What?

[QuickSilver]

:smack:

Confiteor Mod omnipotenti vobis fratres, quia peccavi nimis cogitatione,
verbo, opere et omissione, mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
Translation: I confess to almighty mod, and to you my brothers, that I have sinned exceedingly in thought, word, act and omission, through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault

[ltfire]

@QuickSilver

:smack:

Confiteor Mod omnipotenti vobis fratres, quia peccavi nimis cogitatione,
verbo, opere et omissione, mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
Translation: I confess to almighty mod, and to you my brothers, that I have sinned exceedingly in thought, word, act and omission, through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault

Shouldn’t you be at the Conclave, behind closed doors?

[Polycarp]

@QuickSilver

:smack:

Confiteor Mod omnipotenti vobis fratres, quia peccavi nimis cogitatione,
verbo, opere et omissione, mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
Translation: I confess to almighty mod, and to you my brothers, that I have sinned exceedingly in thought, word, act and omission, through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault

I take it Smackie ( :smack: ) was the closest you could come to a breast-beating smiley?

[FaerieBeth]

@capybara

RAHHRR!
[froth]
NIP NIP NIP NIP. . .

Bwaaahahaha!

[LordVor]

Silly questions. Why is this in the pit? Was the original a pit thread?

[TVeblen]

@LordVor

Silly questions. Why is this in the pit? Was the original a pit thread?

Yes. It was a Pit thread that, while very funny, still contained multiple instances of lyrics of songs reproduced in full.
Not speaking for Lynn here–even though she made the precisesly right calls, IMO–but posters don’t automatically look elsewhere for explanations. In this case, there wasn’t a way to pare the thread down enough to make it legit and have it still make sense. Posters were rollin’ but the thread had just gone south on seeming technicalities, but important technicalities.
The explantion for made where it occured, where most posters would probably notice it anyway, rather than making them seek out an answer or just leave 'em scratching their heads. It really was as much a courtesy as well as a general reminder as anything else.

Veb

[Mycroft_H]

@QuickSilver

Confiteor Mod omnipotenti vobis fratres, quia peccavi nimis cogitatione,
verbo, opere et omissione, mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

Can someone please accept this poor sinner’s confession? How many Hail… (well it wouldn’t be Cecils, would it? Maybe Bodinis. That’s it.) How many hail-Bodinis does he have to say to be redeemed?

And I can add that I’m damned sorry to have missed the original thread. It sounds as if it was a classic, even it is lost to the mists of electronic banishment. (Is banishment misty?)

[Mycroft_H]

Oops. And then I go and misspell Bodoni. I do beg your pardon Madame Administrator. :o

And how many hail-whomevers do I need to say? That is assuming it can be forgiven.

[QuickSilver]

@Polycarp

I take it Smackie ( :smack: ) was the closest you could come to a breast-beating smiley?

:dubious:

Dammit… they’re on to me…

[cj_finn]

@samclem

Wanna give me an example?

From the US Copyright Office:

Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

2. the nature of the copyrighted work;

3. amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The distinction between “fair use” and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission. Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission.

Lyrics are only part of a song. Where, for example, lyrics are themselves a commentary on historical, social, or moral issues and where the lyrics are reproduced for the non-commercial purpose of commentary or parody and where this use does not diminish the marketability of the song from which the lyrics are taken, then quoting the entire song will be considered fair use.

I think that the policy of not reproducing entire articles or entire sets of lyrics is a sound policy; but we need to understand that this policy reflects caution only and not any rule that is definitive as to whether a particular reproduction of copyrighted materials falls within the fair use exception to copyright infringement. In certain cirumstances, even a single verse could give rise to liability. The policy is prudent, but not a get out of jail free card.

CJ

[cj_finn]

Let me reiterate: the policy is fine. It limits liability. Things should continue as they have, more or less.

We simply need to understand that ALL reproductions of copyrighted materials are infringements and that under SOME circumstances, we get a free pass. Since the SDMB is what it is, most if not all instances of copyright violations that take place here will fall under the fair use doctrine. But again, since we can never know where the border between infringement and fair use lies, the policy is a good idea and limits liability. The policy is a reasonable compromise between zero tolerance and anarchy wrt copyrights. We, as a community, just need to be a bit less hysterical in talking about it. Its not rocket science.

CJ