Well, this blog post from Daniel Sieradski of the JTA, which takes bloggers to task for reprinting articles definitely made me think about what I do almost every day on this blog. I guess I am stealing, but I never thought about it that way because there is such a thing as "fair use," in copyright law, and I thought (and still think) my blog falls under that definition:
- What Is Fair Use?
- In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and "transformative" purpose such as to comment upon, criticize or parody a copyrighted work. Such uses can be done without permission from the copyright owner. Another way of putting this is that fair use is a defense against infringement. If your use qualifies under the definition above, and as defined more specifically in this section, then your use would not be considered an illegal infringement.
- So what is a "transformative" use? If this definition seems ambiguous or vague, be aware that millions of dollars in legal fees have been spent attempting to define what qualifies as a fair use. There are no hard-and-fast rules, only general rules and varying court decisions. That's because the judges and lawmakers who created the fair use exception did not want to limit the definition of fair use. They wanted it--like free speech--to have an expansive meaning that could be open to interpretation.
Some articles I publish without comment at all (like Rabbi Angel's Shabbat articles), but those articles contain permissions, and I try to put a lot of links to his website and to his membership area in order to point people in his direction because I love his stuff so much.
Also, in an effort to defend my reposting of news stories in the past, I have to add that I keep an eye on my feedjit constantly, and I notice that my posts are usually LEADING people to click on a newsite not keeping them from clicking. So, I do have to take the author of the JTA article to task for the argument that I might be taking traffic from newsites. I think I am doing the opposite.
Nonetheless, I don't want to play with the edges of either secular law or (G-d forbid), Jewish law. So, this will be the last article I post in it's entirety (unless the article is produced for the express purpose of sharing, it doesn't have a copyright notice, or I have the permission of the author (which I assume is expressed in this article's title).
From now on, I will snip and link so that I don't ruffle any feathers.
For anyone I might have harmed, no matter how small the harm, and for anyone that I might have hurt, no matter how small the hurt, and for anyone I might have lead astray by my actions of reposting articles: I ask your forgiveness.
Steal this post!
By Daniel Sieradski · June 4, 2009
It should be obvious to anyone paying attention that newspapers are in trouble. From major players to minor, cutbacks and closings are presently occurring industry-wide as publishers struggle to find viable business models suited to a 21st century technological paradigm.
The Jewish newspaper market is no exception, with local Jewish newspapers nationwide cutting back their staff and print schedules or shuttering their doors altogether.
One phenomenon that appears to be accelerating the decline of at least some Jewish news organizations is the rise of a group of Jewish news aggregation Web sites, predominantly serving the ultra-Orthodox community, which copy and republish in-full, without permission or payment, content from more prominent Jewish news sources, robbing them of both desperately needed licensing fees and revenue-generating Web site traffic.
JTA, for example, is a syndication service which requires that third parties sign a licensing agreement to redistribute our content. Nearly 100 Jewish newspapers around the world pay for this service dutifully, though that number is now declining due to the state of the industry. While we depend on these revenues to continue in our service as the primary source of national and international Jewish news coverage in North America and around the globe (as well as to provide our staff its parnassah), unauthorized Web sites such as Yeshiva World News, Vos Iz Neias, Matzav.com, COLlive, CrownHeights.info and CrownHeights.ch, which do not have licensing arrangements with JTA, reprint our content — and that of our colleagues and competitors — with impunity, despite the clear illegality of such practices. These Web sites then profit from the sale of advertising alongside our stolen content.
Growing increasingly frustrated with this phenomenon and particularly its prevalence among a group which routinely portrays itself as the sole champion of "Torah Judaism," I turned to Ron Coleman, an intellectual property lawyer and one of Agudath Israel of America's 2009 Avodas Hakodesh honorees, to inquire about the legality and ethical considerations of such practices.
According to Coleman, whether or not one profits from such infringement, "it is not legal to copy-and-paste, in full, a copyright-protected article from any source without permission, even when attributing the copyright owner." It is also, he says, "ethically unacceptable, and essentially a form of theft, to knowingly infringe on someone's copyright."
Though the amoraim and tannaim, the authors of the Talmud, were unclear on the issue of copyright infringement — making cases for and against it — several poskim [Jewish legal authorities] of latter ages, such as Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, Rabbi Zalman Nechemiah Goldberg and Rabbi Chaim Sofer, consider copyright infringement a violation of the eighth commandment: "Thou shalt not steal."
Even if one were to differ with these authorities, nonetheless Coleman believes "there are serious considerations of dina d'malchusa dina [obeying the law of the land] and chillul Hashem [tarnishing God's name]" that are less open to interpretation, and "which may be far more relevant in the context of a Jewish-identified Web site engaged in copyright infringement." By this rationale, when a significant number of ultra-Orthodox Jews are engaged in the overt violation of Jewish law, it reflects poorly not only on the ultra-Orthodox community, but on God Himself.
Such legal and religious considerations don't seem to be slowing these publishers down, however. And that is because they are enabled by their readers and advertisers, who provide them with the incentive to continue in such behavior. Until readers and advertisers alike stop providing these Web sites with traffic and revenue, organizations like ours will have to keep cutting back: Cutting budgets, cutting hours, cutting coverage and cutting staff, until there's nothing left to cut.
And then there will be no content left to steal.