Bloggers Own Copyright Like Any Other Writers

Monday, May 19, 2008 by Julie Cancio Harper.

A colleague at the Editorial Freelancers Association asked for information on blogging and copyright in the U.S. after he read a U.K. blogger’s post at Real E Fun on “Copyrights and Copywrongs.” As a copyright and permissions editor who also blogs, I had a pretty strong reaction to the U.K. blogger’s report on copyright infringement by the Daily Mail.

It helps if you read “Copyrights and Copywrongs” before reading my slightly emotional assessment.

— Good. Now on to the copyright rant. —

The whole idea that only “professional writers” qualify for reprint fees is loony. And that bloggers are not professional writers, so their work can be used for free — bah!

Not only do many professional writers blog, but whether “you’ve been paid for it” (the only actual difference between “professional” and “amateur” writers) has NOTHING to do with copyright protection. If the newspaper liked the writing well enough to print it, then they better well pay a reprint fee. What stuffy nonsense!

(I must be miffed. Look at all those scare quotes!)

The same reasoning in the U.K. article applies in the U.S. That is, blog authors hold copyright to their work until they’ve signed a contract to transfer it to someone else. Posting content on the Internet does not place it in the public domain. If another publication (print or electronic) wants to reprint a blog entry, that publication must first obtain permission from the blogger.

I have a copyright statement on my blog that lists an email address where I can be reached to make it easy for people to write and request permission. If you like my writing, c’mon and shoot me an email if you’d like permission to run it somewhere else. I would love to hear from you. If I really, really like you I may even decide to grant you permission for FREE! Or we could barter. I like stuff. Do you have stuff? Or we can do it the old-fashioned way and you can give me money for a non-exclusive reprint license. I’d like that, too. It’s easy and fun! Let’s be friends.

You never know until you ask. But you do have to ask. Because reprinting someone else’s work without permission is copyright infringement. Which is breaking the law. Which is a crime. Why commit a crime when you can just send an email (or fax or letter by courier pigeon) and ask for permission?

My friend at the EFA writes his blog anonymously and he wondered if that had any effect on copyright issues. My answer: He still holds copyright to his blog. The downside of anonymity is that it makes it more difficult for other publishers to find him to request permission. But it does not mean that publishers have a legal right to skip obtaining permission just because he is difficult to find.

Of course, this doesn’t stop people from using the copyright-holder-is-too-hard-to-find argument and reprinting material without permission. People sometimes do and believe whatever they like until they’re caught and dragged into court. But this argument is still generally inexcusable.

(A total aside: U.S. lawmakers are still working out what we’re supposed to do about actual orphan works — and orphan works are a whole other kettle of fish that I’ll have to discuss some other time. Check out LibraryLaw Blog’s “Why We Need Help with Orphan Works” for a start.)

I find that most people who complain are not actually talking about legitimate orphan works anyway. Upon further inspection, they’re talking about regular permissions that they are too lazy to clear. I have heard many whines and grumbles — from publishing professionals and amateurs alike — about “Can’t we just say it’s fair use? Why doesn’t my single Google name search qualify as due diligence? It’s so HARD to research copyright holders and get permissions . . .”

Well, my answer is dry your tears. This is business so just do the math. You can either 1) do the work and get permission, 2) drop the material, or 3) hire a lawyer willing to fight for lame excuses in court once you’ve been sued. Your financial advisor can confirm that permissions editors are much cheaper than lawyers.

If you prefer to write anonymously as a blogger, perhaps you might consider getting a special email address you can list on your blog so that people seeking permission can contact you this way. And you can still put some sort of copyright notice on your blog, but you might shy away from the U.S. Copyright Office’s sanctioned format because it will include your name: Copyright YEAR NAME.

I don’t know how much protection you’d have by signing with your blogger identity, as in “Copyright 2008 The Anonymous Blogger.” Since I blog using my full name, it’s not been an issue I’ve had to research. But when in doubt you can always go back to the source. The U.S. Copyright Office provides many informative publications that should reveal what is at stake for an anonymous blogger. Circular 1: Copyright Office Basics is a good place to start.

Also, if you want a reprint fee for use of your work, at that point you’re going to have to lose some anonymity if you want someone to write you a check.

There is a lot of copyright education that still needs to be done — as you can tell from the U.K. author’s post, the misconception that “if it’s on the Internet, it’s free” directly affects all copyright holders. Also, as a permissions editor, I spend a fair amount of time reviewing these issues for clients and colleagues. If you have a particular question, please shout it out in the comments section or send me an email.

I’ve thought about copyright issues regarding my blog and I’ve decided that it’s still worth blogging even if being on the web makes it extremely easy for people to steal my writing. What I’ve decided to do is monitor my Internet presence through Google vanity searches. I periodically look up my name and key sentences from blog posts to see if I’ve been poached. So far so good.

But if (maybe when?) I do find someone who has made an unauthorized reprint online, I look forward to going after them (and my paycheck). As for unauthorized reprints in print publications, well, it is true that I can’t read everything ever published. But if I come across an infringement in print (or receive a heads-up from a friend), I’ll go after that paycheck as well. I’ll give no freebies after a copyright infringement.

Updated May 20, 2008: Colleagues have also pointed me to two other articles of interest on the pending Orphan Works legislation.

Today the New York Times ran an op-ed piece called “Little Orphan Artworks,” by  Lawrence Lessig.

And attorney and author Joy Butler covered the issue yesterday on her blog, Guide Through the Legal Jungle, with a post called “What Copyright Orphan Work Legislation Does and Does Not Do.”

Posted in copyright & permissions, blogs & blogging, publishing, attitudes, change your mind, books, freelance, editing, enthusiasms | 1 Comment »