I want to write a hub about Dan Fogelberg and would like to include some of his song lyrics. Is this permissible? What about copyright? Thanks in advance!
I would simply add a link to other authority lyrics pages on the web.
I haven't been able to find info on articles and online use.
I know permission is necessary from the copyright holder if lyrics are included in a published book, if the song is still under copyright protection.
http://www.suite101.com/content/publis- … ers-a67707
It would be good to know as Songs Lyrics is a category under the Music topic. I have included the lyrics of one song underneath a video of the song on one of my hubs. I gave credit to the songwriter and artist.
btw, I love Dan Fogelberg. He's from my old stomping grounds in the midwest.
A lot of different sites have enormous databases of lyrics. Sometimes I just go to Yahoo! and run a search, using a known phrase, then I can go to their page with all of the information - lyrics, attribution, sometimes even copyright info.
As for copyright, there are also sites that detail what is and what isn't allowed. I know that Sonny Bono (at least, I'm pretty sure it was him!) did a lot of lobbying for updates to the copyright laws decades ago. I think that either the Library of Congress or some other site for librarians has some good detailed info about the subject.
Unfortunately, the laws are rather detailed and specific. Most of what I know about copyright and music (and lyrics) relates to the use of copyrighted music in churches. The CCLI website has great info about that niche. I also know that there are separate laws that allow the use of copyright-covered material for certain specific purposes in education. But in a Hub... well, I think that may just require some research.
Edit: That is, research to know what is permitted.
ho ho, habee! Writing lyrics by listening might not be the best way to go. Think of all the songs we mishear - 'There's a bad moon on the rise,' has often become 'There's a bathroom on the right' and so on.
Wow. I've been researching copyright law for lyrics and music. I found out it's illegal to even perform a song in public unless the copyright has expired! How do so many people get away with that??
By paying money to the Performing Rights Society.
Every bar, club, pub or other entertainment venue pays so much per month to Performing Rights Society in order to be allowed to play not only background music, but live music, karaoke, even television.
I used to have to pay nearly $200 a month when I ran a karaoke bar.
It's really pretty complicated. One workshop I attended mentioned that aspect and said that most copyright holders overlook the performance of their works because they actually want them to be performed - but that legally they do have the right to call it a violation.
You may have already seen this good summary. Very detailed, as I said, even just summarized:
http://www.newmediarights.org/guide/leg … yright_law
The point that applies to you, I think, is that "Fair Use" would allow quoting for "educational, commentary, or criticism" uses. It didn't say whether there is a limit on how much can be quoted for those purposes.
I am interested in the subject myself, because I do quote some lyrics in some of my music theory Hubs. If you learn more details, please post here - especially if you learn whether there is a percentage limit on allowed Fair Use.
@IzzyM - This is good to hear. I know that this applies to radios too, or something similar. The aspect I mentioned related to performing specific works in church settings. I know that in schools there are other rules, and in informal settings what I mention above may apply too.
I wanted to summarize some of this, but I'm being bumped from my computer. This article also gives some specific examples of court cases relating to copyright laws and the internet. It also includes common misunderstandings of the doctrine of Fair Use.
Check this out (yes, it's Wikipedia, but it's good):
[QUOTES FROM THE ARTICLE]
Fair use, a limitation and exception to the exclusive right granted by copyright law to the author of a creative work, is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders. Examples of fair use include commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching, library archiving and scholarship. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test.
17 U.S.C. § 107
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:
1.the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2.the nature of the copyrighted work;
3.the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4.the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
The four factors of analysis for fair use set forth above derive from the classic opinion of Joseph Story in Folsom v. Marsh, 9 F.Cas. 342
The four factors of analysis for fair use set forth above derive from the classic opinion of Joseph Story in Folsom v. Marsh, 9 F.Cas. 342 (1841), in which the defendant had copied 353 pages from the plaintiff's 12-volume biography of George Washington in order to produce a separate two-volume work of his own. The court rejected the defendant's fair use defense with the following explanation:
[A] reviewer may fairly cite largely from the original work, if his design be really and truly to use the passages for the purposes of fair and reasonable criticism. On the other hand, it is as clear, that if he thus cites the most important parts of the work, with a view, not to criticize, but to supersede the use of the original work, and substitute the review for it, such a use will be deemed in law a piracy…
In short, we must often… look to the nature and objects of the selections made, the quantity and value of the materials used, and the degree in which the use may prejudice the sale, or diminish the profits, or supersede the objects, of the original work.
Once these factors were codified as guidelines in 17 U.S.C. § 107, they were not rendered exclusive. The section was intended by Congress to restate, but not replace, the prior judge-made law. Courts are still entitled to consider other factors as well.
Fair use tempers copyright's exclusive rights to serve the purpose of copyright law, which the U.S. Constitution defines as the promotion of "the Progress of Science and useful Arts" (Art. I, § 8, cl. 8). This principle applies particularly well to the case of criticism and also sheds light on various other limitations on copyright's exclusive rights, particularly the scenes à faire doctrine.
by Ronald E. Franklin5 months ago
I'm planning a hub about one particular actor in one particular scene of a movie. Without a visual representation of the actor in the scene the article would be meaningless, but no free or non-copyrighted photos appear...
by NotPC2 years ago
HubPages is very firm in their rule to only use photos for which you have permission to use. Hypothetically, what happens if you break this rule? I've seen many people using images that are clearly not theirs to use and...
by Marisa Wright8 years ago
A discussion started about this on the end of another thread, but it's got buried. I was checking an early Hub today and it reminded me, because I'd used a photo from another website. At that time, I didn't...
by Ceres Schwarz3 years ago
Hello. I've read the learning center guide on proper image use. I understood the topic well enough but what has me confused is the subject of fair use. From what I understand from reading the guide on image...
by Janis Leslie Evans4 years ago
I took pics with my camera of images on my tv screen. Is it legal to use them? Edited? Specifically, is it illegal to use them in monetized hubs?
by Marisa Wright4 years ago
I just noticed that Pinterest links are now "No Follow".http://www.polepositionmarketing.com/em … -nofollow/The only link which is still "Do Follow" is the description, which does not always...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.