Paraphrase and attribute. Copyrights protect the expression of ideas. Neither the ideas themselves nor the underlying raw facts are protected. So you can paraphrase, so long as you’re not copying someone’s way of expressing ideas (although it’s always a good idea to attribute where possible to avoid charges of plagiarism and to bolster the quality and credibility of your reporting through the identification and referencing of sources.)
Freely use information in the public domain. The public domain is a vast non-geographical space. It’s filled with freely available content including many government documents and speeches, legal codes and statutes and court opinions, works either too old to be protected by copyright or whose creators are long dead (generally pre-1923 and more than 70 years underground, respectively), and works expressly released from copyright protection by their creators or copyright holders. (Don’t assume release of copyright unless the fact of its release is spelled out. Widespread circulation by a copyright holder does not erase the copyright).
Use information licensed under Creative Commons and respect attribution requests.
Linking to material is generally O.K. But offering a link to promote infringement, for example, to a pirated copy of a newly released song or film, is problematic.
Cut and paste small portions of works subject to copyright protection and be aware of the fact that there is no safe amount defined under copyright law. Under the “fair use” doctrine, those publishing for reasons deemed “fair,” which, according to the U.S. Copyright Office include “criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research”, can use portions of protected expression depending upon four factors. According to the U.S. Copyright Office, those factors are: (1) Non-commercial or non-profit educational purpose of the use; (2) Nature of the copyrighted work; (3)The portion of the amount to be used in relation to the whole; and (4) The effect of the use on the market or value of the work. According to the U.S. Copyright Office: “The distinction between “fair use” and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission. Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission.” According to Harvard Law School’s Berkman Center on Internet & Society: “A citizen journalist who includes text, audio, or video which comments on the original material will enhance their claim of fair use. In addition, use of the original to parody, to expose, or to enhance the user’s argument may qualify as fair use even without commentary directly on the original work, especially if that use has a different purpose than the original.” (Citations omitted.)
Note that a fair use defense may not help you if you gain access to content by circumventing access control technologies, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation. See also, Rule 3.
Get permission before publishing material that doesn’t fall under one of the exceptions above or if you’re unclear whether the fair use exception will apply. (This is easy to accomplish by e-mail, especially if you want to use a private person’s words or images (as opposed to the rights to Chapter 3 of the new Harry Potter novel). Originators are often happy to give permission.)
Get permission before making commercial use of an individual’s name, identity or recognizable likeness (such as in a photograph). In many states, use of a living person’s name or likeness for one’s own advantage can be limited by a right of publicity. Non-commercial uses don’t generally fall under right of publicity. There also are freedom of expression-related exceptions, including use in a newsworthy context; parody, in which the name or likeness is invoked to poke fun at that person; and artistic or literary expression. Satire, in which an individual’s name, image or identity is invoked to poke fun at some other person or entity is not protected in the same way as parody.
