Copyright - using quotes in artwork

[Rushup]

I have a query about copyright law.

 

Lots of artists and designers produce posters displaying famous quotes. These quotes are often a short passage from a book, an excerpt from an interview, perhaps a line from a film or TV program.

 

If I produce and sell a poster displaying quotations - for example this, this, this, or this (these aren't mine by the way) - do I need to seek permission from the author of the quote? I've read that short quotations are seen as non-infringing if there is an attribution to the author, but is there any truth to that?

Edited May 15, 2014 by Rushup

[Dannyno]

I have a query about copyright law.

 

Lots of artists and designers produce posters displaying famous quotes. These quotes are often a short passage from a book, an excerpt from an interview, perhaps a line from a film or TV program.

 

If I produce and sell a poster displaying quotations - for example this, this, this, or this (these aren't mine by the way) - do I need to seek permission from the author of the quote? I've read that short quotations are seen as non-infringing if there is an attribution to the author, but is there any truth to that?

 

This might be helpful:

http://www.dacs.org.uk/knowledge-base/factsheets/exceptions-and-limitations

 

Fair use allows quotation for certain purposes, including criticism and review, but there is no specific artistic exemption.

 

Technically, the overcautious would argue you should try and get permission for everything used, but I don't think you're likely to get into trouble for reproducing sourced short quotes, because the original authors are not likely to suffer financially, are they?

 

The important thing is that the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act refers to prohibition of copying without permission of:

 

"the work as a whole or any substantial part of it"

 

One line quotations are, usually at any rate, not going to be "substantial".

[Rushup]

Thank you for your reply.

 

I read a post from a lawyer on an American website that crediting the source of the quote, ie a person, may lead to legal action in the US due to violation of publicity rights.

 

Are you a legal professional Dannyno?

[Dannyno]

Thank you for your reply.

 

I read a post from a lawyer on an American website that crediting the source of the quote, ie a person, may lead to legal action in the US due to violation of publicity rights.

 

Are you a legal professional Dannyno?

 

No, I'm not. But first of all, your American lawyer is an American lawyer not a UK one. And secondly he's not writing very clearly. And thirdly you've maybe misunderstood the points he's making.

 

He's talking about trademarks, which are legally protected separately from copyright law. But UK law talks about the use of trademarks "in the course of trade", where there might be confusion for example, and also where the use may be "detrimental" to the trademark holder.

 

And he's talking about quoting someone to make it look like they are endorsing a product (what he calls "publicity rights", which are found in US law and are about protecting the commercial use of someone's name, kind of like protection of privacy - UK law doesn't treat this issue in the same way as there is no specific legislation, but there is case law around "passing off" - i.e. false endorsement, and breach of confidence/misuse of private information). Some quotes are famous enough that everyone would know that endorsement could not be reasonably assumed.

 

None of what you seem to want to do would cause any difficulties in terms of any of those points.

[JohnKH]

A short quote might amount to a copyright infringement.

 

Copyright exists in the '...whole or a substantial part of it' (Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988, s.16(3))

 

So if you are using a short quote - that is not the 'whole' of the intellectual creation - so you might think - I'm in the clear. BUT!!! This leaves open the question as to whether the short quote is a 'substantial part'.

 

Now, I can't do any better (for the purposes of this post) than what the Intellectual Property Office say about 'substantial part':

 

[THEY WONT LET ME POST THE LINK UNTIL I HAVE MADE 5 POSTS]

 

- google 'IPO' and 'Substantial Part'

 

I hope that helps.

 

---------- Post added 05-06-2014 at 12:59 ----------

 

An addendum to what you asked about attribution: No... attribution does not absolve you from a copyright infringement.

 

What copyright does/means is that the creator/owner has the EXCLUSIVE right to make/authorise copies.

 

Attribution is often a licence condition - the copyright owner will say, 'yes, I will allow you to use my creation but I want you to include an attribution to me'.

 

I think we are probably concerned only with express permission being relevant in your case, but where the Internet is concerned, there is increasingly 'implied' permission - Flickr, for example... if a photographer does not turn-off the 'embed' function - it is likely that the Courts would view that as a case of the rights owner having given an implied permission to make the copy by embedding the image into your own Twitter/Facebook/Webpage.

 

---------- Post added 05-06-2014 at 13:02 ----------

 

This might be helpful:

...[had to remove your link]....

 

Fair use allows quotation for certain purposes, including criticism and review, but there is no specific artistic exemption.

 

Technically, the overcautious would argue you should try and get permission for everything used, but I don't think you're likely to get into trouble for reproducing sourced short quotes, because the original authors are not likely to suffer financially, are they?

 

The important thing is that the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act refers to prohibition of copying without permission of:

 

"the work as a whole or any substantial part of it"

 

One line quotations are, usually at any rate, not going to be "substantial".

 

Wrong...

 

If a short quote is what the work in which copyright subsists is known for, then arguably, copyright will be infringed. As a minimum, however, I think the quote would need to be about dozen words or more...

 

---------- Post added 05-06-2014 at 13:54 ----------

 

And just another related point on 'attribution': what it would serve to do in this case is deprive you of being able to claim 'independent creation' - which probably wouldn't have legs in any event in the circumstances... but by attributing the quote you are saying 'Yes, I copied it from here'.

Edited June 5, 2014 by JohnKH