I search for and find a paper on line. It's a pdf, has an author, date, phne no. and address in the header. It does not have a statement of "copyright" on it. I find it in a simple search with some key words.
Do you think I can download that copy and use it, quote from it, etc. without permission? Should I just reference the (alleged) author's name and where the paper was found? I'm not thinking about taking credit for it as though I wrote it, but the fact that it's simply published for free where anyone can access it, does that open it to the public domain?
I'm not positive the difference as to my boundaries between when something is copyrighted and when it has an author but no copyright.
I'm no lawyer, but I would think that you could use it without specific permission as long as you cite it when paraphrasing or quoting directly from it.
The second paragraph explains how things are copyrighted without having to state it as such.
As I understand the process, EVERYTHING is automatically copy righted from the moment it is created. The copyright symbol is just added protection.
You must cite when using.
Thanks gentlemen....very clear. Everything is copyrighted as soon as its created. There is no difference whether it is marked or not.
Not to pee on parades here, but it seems the context of material is paramount to your decisions. Is this a legal document from the recorders office, or something off of some blog somewhere? Big difference. A recorded survey bearing your seal is your baby. If you recite a deed call based on record information is ok, just call out the record.
To post a picture of some persons cat and claim rights is just plain sick.
I don't think our posts here are copy right material. Nor are stupid emails or texts sent to our buddies. If it's on the internet, it is public knowledge and made available (ask the NSA). That's how you found it, so it is not copy righted.
If you like the material so much, re-type it and just change a word here and there. Things like "could be" can soon become "may be". Bingo. I'm not so sure I would like to cite unknown authors for things. It could run full circle and bite you in the butt in a few years, depending on "alleged damages".
Paraphrasing is one thing. Cutting and pasting is another thing.
$0.02
> If you like the material so much, re-type it and just change a word here and there. Things like "could be" can soon become "may be". Bingo.
> Paraphrasing is one thing. Cutting and pasting is another thing.
"The infringement need not be a complete or exact copy. Paraphrasing or copying with evasion is an infringement, even though there may be little or no conceivable identity between the two."
I agree with you "G". If you peed on my parade, I didn't even feel it until you told me that's what you were doing...:-/
I was discussing it from a legal perspective, and the link answered my question very well, in that every original paper is automatically copyrighted. for the particular pdf I found, I have no problem citing it, and giving the alleged author credit. And that got me to thinking, "don't I have to whether they go through some kind of legal copyright registration or not"? That was the basis for the question.
gotcha Mark. I just think that just because somebody puts something on the internet it is automatically copy righted. I respectfully disagree with some others. If I like somebodies thoughts (or good jokes) I may quote them to some buddies, but not for business use. If I were to, I'd get their explicit permission.
My question was more along the lines of legal recorded documents vs somebodies blogging ideas. Never was any clarity on that, just some pdf you found surfing for ideas. We all do on a regular basis, and often times too often.
Lots of posters here ask things like "hey, got any good proposal templates", or "hey, how about a seed file for some CAD thing I'm working on". Etc, etc....and we're a pretty good group of contributors here sharing ideas. Thanks Wendell. You get my point I hope
If the author puts a copyright symbol or notice on the work, then they are entitled to damages. If not, it's still an infringement but the author will not see any monetary reward for pursuing the infringement (at least not as easily).
