What's the policy re: answers that are a literal "cut and paste" of content from elsewhere - sometimes even with the COPYRIGHT notice saying copying isn't ok?

Comments

• Ooops .. maybe I wasn't clear. Didn't mean to say it was question and answer content .. as in from another Q& A site or something.
  I meant any source at all online with "content" .. that answers the question. Could be an individual's website. Could be commercial. Could be from a non-profit. Could be an educational site. Or government site.
  You bring up a good point that "the length of" something in proportion to the original whole is certainly a factor when determining fair use .. but even then ... it's typically to do a review or critique of "it" vs plugging down long bits of text here at AB to answer a question. And it's one factor of many.
  Many sites hold "us" accountable for content we add to the site .. and say that it must be original ..ie .. content we own .. or have rights to if owned by someone else.
  Just wondered (since there's no flag for it) how it's normally been handled here at AB.
  Did that help clarify what I'm trying to ask?

  • Report
  

  by debtahals wears a curiosity COAT on January 16th, 2009

• If it's a direct quote it should include attribution, but I really believe that anything short of a substantial part or whole of a work can legally be quoted as the answer to a question and would fall under fair use.
   
  I am guessing AB attorneys have looked at it and feel the same, or they would provide a way to flag it.

  • Report
  

  by Jim in a Nautilus COAT on January 16th, 2009

• Well, think I've got my answer. Just wandered off to find the AB Terms of Use. Here they are:
  http://www.answerbag.com/a_view/15
  Moderation flags exist. However, they aren't meant as tools to flag potential instances of copyright infringement as seen in user content contributed. Instead, as I began to suspect, responsibility for content we contribute is clearly laid out in the TOU.
  As such, a copyright owner would have to contact AB staff about what they see as an in fringement (and AB has made it clear it's the users, not AB who is responsible for what is contributed and its IP status). AB would then investigate - and have the TOU agreement btw itself and the AB user to go by.
  So if I see something that I think might be an infringement, I'm personally going to consider it none of my business.
  And of course, I'll think about IP as we talked about here as I go about contributing content myself.
  So far, only run into a handful of potential copyright infringement posts.
  Thanks!

  • Report
  

  by debtahals wears a curiosity COAT on January 16th, 2009

Comments

• Let's say I post a question or just wander about and see an interesting question. I'm going through the answers. I see one that's right on target (it answers the question) but it's clear to me it's not likely the poster's answer/words/work. That tells me it was copied from elsewhere on the WWW.
  That leads to this question. Sometimes that copied content is in the public domain. If so and it helps, great. If it's NOT in the public domain .. ie .. it's unclear or has a copyright notice (notices are no longer required .. the default is .. it IS under copyright) ... then .. it's illegal to copy and PUBLISH it elsewhere.
  Ok .. so let's say someone does copy from elsewhere .. and there's an on target answer for the question, but it's a copyright infringement. What do I do when I run into that here at AB? There's no flag for that. Not spam. Not offensive. Not a duplicate. But illegal.
  Just seemed like this must have come up re: answers here at AB before. Looking for how to handle it.
  PS - out of points for you again! :(

  • Report
  

  by debtahals wears a curiosity COAT on January 16th, 2009

• If it is something that you think is illegal I would simply report it to AB staff via feedback and let them deal with it,m'dear! :)

  • Report
  

  by RosieGHM Jetpacker on January 16th, 2009

• Intellectual property rights are something I'm very interested in. A complex topic. Dealt with them when working and indeed licensed many of them & got non-disclosures signed. But also dealt with "fair use" for educational purposes, etc. (a MUCH misunderstood and overused term)
  All came up again related to genealogy, family history, oral interviews, etc ... as to "who owns what".
  Came up again with scrapbooking or website creation - when using "clip art" or "stock photos" and such.
  Came up again with blog
  Many think that no matter if text, image, sound, video - if it's online, it's fair game to use as we like. No way!!
  And those who want things "free" yet are the first to cry out if someone re-uses or makes derivative works from "their" efforts.
  Oh my .. a hot button.
  But just ran into an answer late last night. A copy and paste of content .. with the url where it came from with it. Many think if you SOURCE IT, you're ok. Not so. Even (c) notice got copied.
  (done now!)

  • Report
  

  by debtahals wears a curiosity COAT on January 16th, 2009

Comments