Quoting = plagiarism?

[SpiderBraids]

Some time ago, I was accused of plagiarism when I quoted a few posters in a podcast I produce. Someone told me, in not so kind words, that saying that quoting without permission is fair game is like saying it's okay to steal other people's words, and called it plagiarism. Another told me, in kinder words, that although my intentions to use the quotes were fine, it would still be like trying to pass off a verbatim copy of Romeo and Juliet as your own work. (For the record, I did give credit to the posters, but the poster who first complained about this didn't care that I did and asked me to edit out her comment, so I did.)

I've always asked for permission to use quotes since then, but tell me, where is the line between quoting and plagiarism?

[KamelRed]

Plagiarism does not give credit to the original source. But since you gave credit I see nothing wrong with quoting them.

Pretty cut and dry if you ask me.

[jedinat]

As far as I know, it's okay to quote anything as long as you cite the source.

~Kamel beat me~

[ImClueless]

Agreed as long as you cite it should be fine since they put in the public domain. If they don't like you quoting them though I guess its a nice gesture to remove it.

[Aoie_Emesai]

As said on the 2 post above. Citing and giving credit to your sources should be 100% ok. If you did cite your "quote" did you ask why that person charge you on plagiarism?

Lets use some definition for comparison for our figure.

******

plagiarism - the act of appropriating the literary composition of another author, or excerpts, ideas, or passages therefrom, and passing the material off as one's own creation.

quoting -Directly copying the words of another author. Place quotation marks (ie. “ “) around the text you are quoting and reference the work.

*******
Interpretating the difference is rather hard. Let me think on this one.

[SpiderBraids]

Does it make any difference if I didn't ask the posters for permission to quote? Because that's what the posters called me out on.

[rooboy]

It's sort of rude, but hardly plagiarism. Plagiarism is the specific act of copying someone else's work without attributing it to them.

Generally it's polite if you're going to quote someone to ask them, but it depends on the quote. If they ask you not to quote them, it's also polite to stop doing so. Since the quote is presumably floating around on the internet somewhere, it's not really like they could stop you if you went ahead and did it anyway.

[Jiji]

Well, is your podcast some kind of news/info thing? If it is, then it definately comes under the Fair Use Act. (Although that's what it's called in the U.S., Fair Use is commonly accepted internationally.) News of any kind can make use of even coprighted material so long as there isn't Malice Aforethought or Absence of Malice.

In addition, people who post to public forums give up their right to their posts when they sign up. (It's a common feature of the "Terms Of Use" thing that none of us read when we sign up for places like this.)

Rooboy and others are right, though. It's just nice to remove things when people ask us to do so. Otherwise, it devolves into a legal pissing contest, like those you can read on SA, for instance. heh.

[Kyuusai]

It's not plagiarism if you credited the author. That much is clear cut.

The issue of copyright infringement is another matter, but considering that they posted it to a public forum, that argument is shaky, especially if you only quoted them in part, or if a quote in whole covered a very minor amount.

In short, they're full of it. Don't sweat it.

[Vexx]

Fair Use, Creative Commons, especially if you cited the references... and anyone who puts material or speech into a public venue is just living in fantasy if they think they can control the meme spread. Heh

[kiba122]

i kinda agree with the mean guy like i wold not sue or anything but kindly ask the m to take it of

[WanderingKnight]

Man, quote away, who is he to censor your freedom of grabbing and posting his own words while stating that they belong to him?

In literature, it's damn fair and perfectly legal to do so (authors do it all the time, grab any type of essay and check the footnotes).

[Knightmare213]

Looks like someone didn't know what the word plagiarism really meant.

No, I'm not referring to you, SpiderBraids. Whoever said that you plagiarized her comments doesn't really make sense, but you did the right thing by citing who and where it was said. So, you really didn't nothing wrong...yet that person says that you did...

[Ewok]

Uhh, I can copy anything written on this forum and use it wherever I wish. It would be polite to point out its from Animesuki, moreso to say its from a particular user, but what you type is NOT your own, it is owned by Animesuki, and unless you are using it for commercial uses and saying it is your own original work then there is no legal standing.

[SeijiSensei]

Originally Posted by Ewok

Uhh, I can copy anything written on this forum and use it wherever I wish. It would be polite to point out its from Animesuki, moreso to say its from a particular user, but what you type is NOT your own, it is owned by Animesuki, and unless you are using it for commercial uses and saying it is your own original work then there is no legal standing.

Really? Where does it say that?

The only copyright notice I see at the bottom of this page is for Jelsoft, the author of the vBulletin software. I don't see any place on AS (e.g., in the FAQ or similar document) where ownership of comments is explicitly discussed. Contrast that to the following disclaimer at the Slashdot forum:

"All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2007 OSTG."

In the absence of some specific language transferring ownership to AS, copyright in the comments remains with the posters. Now it could be that I agreed to transfer my rights to AS when I first registered; it's been so long I don't recall what was in the registration form. Anyone else remember?

This doesn't really pertain to the "plagiarism" complaint, however. There, as Ueda observes, the "fair use" provisions of the US Copyright Act apply, especially now that the servers are located in Texas. Notice, however, the "amount and substantiality" language in this clause. Fair-use was designed, among other reasons, to allow critics or news organizations to cite small portions of a copyrighted work without first obtaining a license from the copyright holder. Including all of a work usually means it's not eligible for the fair-use exemption. So SpiderBraids might be able to include, say, this paragraph under the fair-use exemption, but not my entire posting.

Most people don't really care about who owns their comments, but I think it would be advisible if the AS forums carried a disclaimer similar to the Slashdot one that explicitly granted ownership either to the posters or to AS. I don't care either way, but at least we'd all be on firmer ground when things like this come up.

[Jiji]

I just went to another computer and started the signup process to see what agreements we all agreed to...and--nothing. There's a disclaimer of poster's views being their own and a note of posts being removed for any reason, but nothing about ownership of said posts.

Just as with any written thing (as a writer, I have to do this), you would have to append to each and every page, a claim of copyright. What I mean is, on each page of a manuscript I submit to a publisher, I put my name and "copyright (date)" So, if you wanted to "own" your comments on a forum such as this, you'd have to make a signature that said, "comments are copyright (me) (date)"

BUT: even then, Fair Use still applies and your copyrighted comments can be fairly used on news sources.

[Vexx]

And then someday, all innovation ceased because every possible permutation of what could be uttered or played was locked up legally ....

There's actually some science fiction short story that explores this but I can't remember it to cite it.