Blog Legal Question

[BWFoster78]

I read a blog post that made my blood boil, and I wanted to do the following:

1. link to it
2. summarize the points that I believe are wrong (it's about self publishing and the guy sounds like he wrote it about the state of self publishing in the 1800s)
3. rebut it.

The blog post clearly state, however, that you can't reuse any portion of it without the idiot's express permission.

I was thinking that the "fair use" doctrine would allow me to do what I'm planning. What say you?

[BWFoster78]

Okay. Did a little research myself. This is what the Electronic Frontier Foundations says:

Short quotations will usually be fair use, not copyright infringement. The Copyright Act says that "fair use...for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright."

I think I'm good. I didn't even quote the guy, just offered some pithy summarizations.

[Aosto]

Well now you have me intrigued as to the contents of the blog post. Are you willing to link us to it?

[Chime85]

It's hard to say without knowing the exact content of the blog (that in itself seems to be part of the problem haha), the site (tumblre etc) and how you exactly you intend to do what you want to do.

Linking the blog shouldn''t be a problem, he does not own the web address, he probably doesn't even technically own what he placed on the website. It's on public display, assuming you didn't have to sign in to anything to read it, he hasn't got much of a leg to stand on.

If it is something he created, such as a script, then it is his. If that's the case, it might be worth staying on the side of caution and not picking this particular battle. If he has quouted someones work, he has no right to withold that information. It sounds like he has cited information that was not originally his own, I wonder whos permission he got for that?

My advice, either write your rebuttle on his page, therefore keeping within the confines of "his" domain. Or, you can simply copy the link and write your remarks on your own page.

Double check the blog hosting sites legal bits and bobs to see what exactly he can claim rights to. I highly doubt his rights are as firm as he believes they are.

x

ps: when you've checked your standing and written your remarks, pls post a link :P hehe

[Steerpike]

You should be fine, BWFoster. I wouldn't worry about it. As you said, you're not even using any of his text (and even if you were using short excerpts, you'd be OK). You don't need permission to discuss someone else's work, or to cite it in doing so. It is hard to envision him being successful were he to object to a link to it.

[BWFoster78]

Steerpike,

Thanks. That's what I thought, but it's good to get your opinion on it. I hate it when people add those stupid disclaimers. You can't use any of this post without my permission? Really?

Aosto,

Well now you have me intrigued as to the contents of the blog post. Are you willing to link us to it?

It's live on my blog now. The link is in my sig file.

To save you from having to click, though: He basically posted about self publishing like the last five years didn't exist. He implied that self publishing is what "vanity" publishing used to be, and all his points seemed to center around that misconception.

[BWFoster78]

It's hard to say without knowing the exact content of the blog (that in itself seems to be part of the problem haha), the site (tumblre etc) and how you exactly you intend to do what you want to do.

Linking the blog shouldn''t be a problem, he does not own the web address, he probably doesn't even technically own what he placed on the website. It's on public display, assuming you didn't have to sign in to anything to read it, he hasn't got much of a leg to stand on.

If it is something he created, such as a script, then it is his. If that's the case, it might be worth staying on the side of caution and not picking this particular battle. If he has quouted someones work, he has no right to withold that information. It sounds like he has cited information that was not originally his own, I wonder whos permission he got for that?

My advice, either write your rebuttle on his page, therefore keeping within the confines of "his" domain. Or, you can simply copy the link and write your remarks on your own page.

Double check the blog hosting sites legal bits and bobs to see what exactly he can claim rights to. I highly doubt his rights are as firm as he believes they are.

x

ps: when you've checked your standing and written your remarks, pls post a link :P hehe

Chime,

A lot of his article is valid. It advises authors to avoid the latest fads in publishing. Then he writes this section on self publishing where he basically goes off on the practice based on things like: where are you going to sell the books? Amazon? Then you have to go down to the post office and mail them all yourself.

Really? What century are you living in, dude?

My blog link is in my sig file. The post in question is the top one.

Thanks for your interest.

[Steerpike]

Mail them? So he's talking about physical publishing rather than eBooks, I think. Or does he ever draw the distinction?

[BWFoster78]

Mail them? So he's talking about physical publishing rather than eBooks, I think. Or does he ever draw the distinction?

When I first read the post, I assumed that I had ran across something from five years ago or something. They guy never mentions ereaders or POD. He seems to think that you still need to buy hundreds of books and stack them in your garage.

[Aosto]

Commenting on his blog will likely lead nowhere. He has them moderated. I commented none-the-less.

One note on your views to self publishing. You seem to be against it on all fronts. However you fail to mention eBooks. Printed medium is no longer the only medium one can read a book in. Kindle, Nook, PDF, etc... These are all valid forms of self publishing that have been successful for many. If it weren't then I don't suspect many would still be going that route. Also, I don't see mention of print on demand anywhere in that article. I speak for many when I say that I feel your views on self publishing are vastly out dated.

Was my comment should he not approve it.