English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

10 answers

Depends on the context. You can republish parts for news reporting; and quite substantial parts for political or educationall discussion purposes but not for profit as such.

In my opinion you can almost always justify the reprinting of a single brief question and answer as an example of something, provided you give the source and don't plagiarize.

A separate, grey, area is the "republication" by use of a link in your own blog or work. In the beginning of the Internet there was a major to-do over linking of text inside frames, thereby deleting advertising and perhaps credits. But HTML has moved on, and "styles" work differently and apparently don't raise the same objection, which was anyway never settled. Another objection was to linking to inside pages rather than home pages, but that objection, too, went away as unenforceable and/or pedantic. Blogs link to inside pages all the time and I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to. Restrictions on use, allowed under copyright law, can't include how you get to the article (in this case using the URL that gets you to the particular question and answer).

In the olden days a copyright notice had to be included for something to be copyrighted. Now the default is that something is copyrighted unless it is specificlaly in the public domain. Or is 90 years old in USA, 50 years in Canada or 75 years if published in the European Union. The date is death of author or from publkication if a corporate author.

The actual law is very complex. Thus, in the USA something that has gone into the public domain because of age remains there despite subsequent change of law. In Europe, when they extended the copyright duration things in the public domain went back into copyright! (Copyright duration has periodically been extended after lobbying and campaign contributions to Congresspersons from the industry including firms such as Disney and Warner Bros (the latter own the copyright to "Happy Birthday to You").

Bear in mind, finally, that Yahoo!'s terms and conditions probably waive many or all of the rights of the author. I haven't read them, but you probably should. These may address the rights of access and use of the open forum material, and responsibility for libellous and scandalous material. (In the USA publishers such as Yahoo! are largely immune from prosecution or lawsuit for libel; in the UK and perhaps other parts of Europe that is not the case: and the First Amendment (press freedom, implying a "public figure" doctrine under the Supreme Court decisionin New York Times v. Sullivan) does not apply beyond the borders of the USA. Yahoo! stuff is deemed published everywhere, although that doesn't make it prosecutable everywhere, as the attempt by France to prosecute for sale of Nazi memorabilia proved.)

2006-08-21 17:53:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Sorry that what you theory became a BFF, became fairly only a pal that became utilising you for her own needs and fairly became no longer a BFF in any respect. So rather of stressful about convincing her of something, basically enable her to bypass her way, she will be able to go back and settle for you as you're, if she is a real pal. So do no longer waste a at the same time as and ability, you've a lot to furnish the others that evaluate you sensible and sensible.

2016-11-26 22:29:04 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

you might have to check with yahoo if this becomes their property after posting. if it is then they will be covered by copyright laws. you might need to get permission first. i would love to read a book with all the crazy stuff that gets said here. it's pretty telling on what people really feel but are afraid to say in public. the political correctness has gone out the window on this site.

2006-08-21 18:06:13 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It's my intellectual property. I'm going to follow you now and answer all of your questions so I can sue you for the return of my intellectual property or the cash compensation of said properties from which you are profiting. GO ahead. PUBLISH me

Nah, I thinkit's ok, postsecret does a book of things submitted to him. Interesting site, by the way. www.postsecret.blogspot.com

2006-08-21 17:53:35 · answer #4 · answered by kittycollector32 3 · 1 0

That depends on Yahoo! Answers agreement when we "all signed up." Did it say anything about our answer becoming their legal property, anything you post on MySpace.com IMMEDIATELY becomes property of MYSPACE.COM. Look it up!

So, go back and read the agreement!

2006-08-21 18:00:01 · answer #5 · answered by AdamKadmon 7 · 0 0

People do it all the time.

2006-08-21 17:54:40 · answer #6 · answered by profile image 5 · 0 0

Trueblue88 said, "Yep. There is no copyright. Just don't claim you said it. Citiation is the key to not plagiarising."

2006-08-21 17:51:38 · answer #7 · answered by trueblue88 5 · 0 0

I think you might have to share the royalties with all of us, as co-authors. I'd like cash.

2006-08-21 17:51:08 · answer #8 · answered by mightymite1957 7 · 0 0

If in doubt and you want to publish them - REPHRASE them. They are then YOUR copyright.

2006-08-21 17:51:38 · answer #9 · answered by PP4865 4 · 0 0

They are in an open forum

2006-08-21 17:50:04 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers