I'm writing a book which analyzes news media, politics, and popular culture. If I mention, for example, a news broadcast on a specific day with a guest making comments, and mention that in my book, do I need to seek copyright permission from the news network, since they essentially copyright their broadcasts? I am summarizing the interview, or summarizing what an article in a newspaper said. Is this considered paraphrasing? Or am I accessing facts, similar to what the news agency did?

All Answers To Questions

No, you do not need permission. First, let me state that many people confuse copyright laws with plagiarism rules from school. For example, giving credit for a quote is a plagiarism issue from school rules that has NOTHING to do with copyright. 1. You are clearly including the material for the purpose of commentary. 2. The amount you are quoting is not substantial 3. The affect on the value of the copyright work is not substantial. Some of these need a bit more explanation: 1. Self-explanatory 2. You aren't writing "I like this book:" and then quoting the entire book as an excuse to copy someone else's book. 3. If you convince people that someone else's work is not worth reading and thus hurt its value, this is not a copyright violation. If you copy so much of someone else's work that people don't need to buy that work anymore (because they read enough of it in your work), then that weighs toward a copyright violation. But be clear: the courts weigh all of these measures together. If you write a book that picks apart someone else's articles line by line as commentary, that is totally fine, even though you have reproduced a substantial amount of the other works. Don't fall into the "let me print the entire article before I comment on it so that you know what I'm talking about" trap. But you can write: In his first line, Smith claims that the mall was packed. I have researched mall records and found this to be false. In his second sentence, Smith writes that "teenagers are bad shoppers". Exactly what does he mean by the word "bad"? I disagree with this characterization. In his third sentence, Smith writes that teenage shoppers "are like locusts swarming a tree". Smith is clearly expressing his biased viewpoint, not any factual description. In his fourth sentence...

For your intended summarizations, as long as you give a really good biblography that shows people where you got your information, that should suffice, and you don't need the source's permission to list them. The copyright is on the content, not the fact it exists or where it exists. People who write books often seek permission to quote other publication's articles and use their photographs because it gives their own book more legitimacy with other writers. In some cases you HAVE to get permission for photographs because they are the property of a third party who gave the right to use the photograph to the publication - you don't get an easy out on those.

No you don't need copyright permission as long as you give mention in your book on any quote you show next to the word with a number to refer to as a reference on either the bottom of the page or in a listing of credits in the back of the book. Credit is to be given in all cases as the best way to avoid a lawsuit for copyright infringement. When in doubt, give credit as there is nothing to lose by doing so and potentially a lot to lose by not giving credit. The reader doesn't notice nor care if you give credit, as the reader is reading for content as you have written.