I've got a treasure trove of clipped articles but they're only useful to me if I cant copy and send.
Does anyone know the facts?

Pepe Ray

Copy right laws allow personal not for profit use. You probably would be able to copy them and give to others for there personal use but once you charge anything then everything changes. Consider the climate today I personally will not copy anything for anyone. If the're known and in my area will let them use the magazine or whatever and they can copy if that's there choice. I insist on getting my original materials back.

I have no issues with the occasional article copy-and-send, but that is based on the improbability of it ever being discovered. I believe it is technically illegal if it is done to get around someone purchasing a copy, such as happens with music file sharing. It can be justified if the copy is corroborating information in a study or a legal action. People copy magazine articles at libraries all the time. The fact something is out of print would be a pretty good justification.

Copyright law has always allowed quoting, provided the source is given credit. It is not unlimited, though. You could quote a number of paragraphs, but whole chapters are not normally within acceptable limits unless they are very short. I noticed that full copies of Hatcher's Notebook and other old gun books are downloadable for free on line. That is a questionable practice.

If something is out of print long enough and nobody living authored it, you might be able to show the copyright has been abandoned? But you would need to make a good faith effort to find out if an estate or other holder of the copyright existed in order to have an affirmative defense if you were sued by an unknown holder of the right. For example, a charity that was bequeathed the copyright by a famous author.

Think the music industry has a 75 year copyright. Not sure about printed matter. Always understood if credit was given to original author/publisher, texts could be referenced.

What I had in mind would make it impossible for the original author to claim an "intent to defraud" or "theft".
A photo copy, complete with all illustration and author's name could hardly be deemed villainous in nature. The matter would be complete, with nothing added.
The single complaint that I could envision would be that of "profiteering", by selling for the express purpose of attempting to make a living from the product.
If expenses could be covered by accepting donations, then the profiteering accusation would fail. -- NO?

Pepe Ray

Think the music industry has a 75 year copyright. Not sure about printed matter. Always understood if credit was given to original author/publisher, texts could be referenced.
referenced, yes. duplicated...to what end? I think that copies for education are generally exempt from copyright violations, education meaning college students.

If you scan the clippings to aid yourself in organizing the material you are probably safe. If you giv a copy to someone else you have deprived the author of a sale and profits. It doesn't matter that you made no profit. Refrencing is only for limited quotes. Enforcement is anotgher matter, but the best way to not get caught is to not do the crime.

Apparently educational copies don't include copying music. At least, not recorded music. Sheet music, I don't know? That's getting a little off-topic, firearms-wise, though. As related to gun magazine and firearm-related newspaper articles, I think we are still pretty safe to quote no more than a paragraph or maybe two at a time. Books, likewise, I should think. In an infringement or plagiarism suite, I think the plaintiff has to prove intent to deprive him of profits. If you copy, say, by skipping every third word but substantially convey the whole content of an article, you might be vulnerable. At that point it is best to suggest the reader buy the article or, if it is on line, just to give them a link. We've recently had whole newspaper stories copied into a post on gun politics and policy.

Admitting to ignorance, therefore the question, I remain confused by the responses.
Question;
How does an entire, 100%, scan of ANY article from a periodical issued years ago, and presented as such, without changes or claims attached, percolate a charge of fraud or theft?

If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck ----!!

Pepe Ray

The word "copyright" means just that: the right to copy, without which you have no right to copy, by definition. Every once in awhile you hear about the estate of one author or another going after someone who's published a copy of something the deceased author wrote.

Understand, this is like patents in that there is no police force out there looking for violations. It is up to the copyright holder to police it for himself, just as it is up to a patent holder to catch a violator in the act. Then it is up to the copyright holder to fund suing the violator, same as with patents. There are even special courts to handle these cases. There is no criminal law involved, normally, though it can be, as happens when systematic and routine infringement is prosecuted and/or the business doing it (i.e., the original Napster) is shut down. Music and software authors are much more vigorous in searching out violators than magazines and newspapers seem to be. I expect the latter often prefer the credit and publicity when a copy is credited to them. But, technically, you should get their written permission first.

Pepe, what kind of distribution are you planning?

Example -- I have some old clips that I occasionally share with friends. No problem.

Example -- teacher copying materials for distribution to students. Very nearly lost her job.

Example -- employees photocopying many versions of an expensive technical publication. Didn't get sued but there were some very tense moments when the photocopying was discovered.

pmeisel et all;
If I ever had a notion to have a "distribution" it has long been dispelled.

Some of the "old farts" reading here may understand my position. Over the last 35 yrs +/-, I've clipped many items found in periodicals. Most were concentrated in the firearms/shooting sports arena. There were/are a very few favorites.
Recently, contemplating my mortality, I've considered how to best preserve the treasure trove of adventure and technology I've amassed over the past 35 yrs. I began by sorting, finding authors scattered in various categories in my files. In large part this project was triggered by a few fellow posters on the few forums I frequent. They expressed regret over loosing their favorites and reminiscing, wishing that they had recovered this or that article.
After locating and listing chronologically the work of 2 authors, I found a total of 211 items, (140+71).
One poster who had expressed regret at not retaining a specific article and who seemed worthy of my empathy, was contacted. I offered to locate and send electronically, the item when found. Not being a PC whiz, I struggled thru the scanning and sending the item to him, the 7 pages. He seemed appreciative and I was pleased to make him happy. At the time I had no notion that I'd done something dishonest. After all, I'd purchased the original in good faith, stored it reverently and shared in an arena I supposed would have met with the authors approval.
Somewhat like sharing a slice of Blueberry pie purchased from a neighbor.

At this time, I have not counted the individual pages within these 171 items but I estimate an average of 4 pages per item giving an estimated 684 pages. It could be much greater.
Because of the popularity of these two authors, I'm certain that if I were to offer to share these files electronically I'd be swamped with requests. Charging a fee to cover the wear & tear on the scanner alone may reduce the number of frivolous requests, but would not only be illegal but seem ingenuous as to my original intent.

I envision a conflagration when I'm gone.

If you can spare the time, I think it would be very wise to scan your clippings to preserve them and allow for ease of sharing, privately, as you have it the past.

It may not be technically legal, but as long as you do not publicize or profit, I think you are unlikely to be bothered.

My scanner broke a year ago and I haven't replaced it yet, but I have been thinking of doing something similar, for ease of indexing if nothing else.

Plus you could contact the original publisher for permission to distribute some limited number of copies (you pick the number) to friends and associates. If the articles are out of print and the publisher does not make the magazine back issues available for sale and is does not have or does not intend to have them duplicated in a compilation or other book, then I don't see how they would benefit from saying no? If they do make copies available for sale, then you've got a source you can direct people to if they find themselves wishing they hadn't let the article get away? That would save wear and tear on you and the scanner (though you really only have to scan each one once and save it as a .PDF file for sharing). If you don't have a .PDF file writer, the Cute PDF Writer (http://www.cutepdf.com/Products/CutePDF/writer.asp) is free. It acts like a printer, but saves the file as a copy in PDF format instead of printing it.

Thanks UncleNick;
Even tho I had presumed that the author had control, it seems like you have a viable suggestion. It's certainly worth a try.
Pepe Ray

if it's for your personal use it shouldn't be a problem. Even with music and data you are legally allowed to make a backup copy of any that you own.

f###;
What's the point? For my own use I already have the clippings. They are much more user friendly in their present form. Looks like I've got them all to my self. Unless I can get permission from the publishers. It would be stupid for me to scan 600 t0 700 pages to read on a computer screen.
Pepe Ray

Once scanned into word they would be searchable. If you can remember a quote from an article or wa t to read up on a particular subject you can find the information easier. Also a copy could be stored on a cd in your safe deposit box. Are sone ofthe older pages begining to get yellowed and brittle?

if it's for your personal use. . . Even with music and data you are legally allowed to make a backup copy of any that you own.

I'd heard that was true in Europe, but had not heard of it being so here. The copy protection on music certainly is intended to prevent that both here and in Europe, though a work-around isn't hard to find.

In times past, we all had tape recorders and/or cassette decks that let us make copies that nobody complained about. What changed in the digital music age is the copies don't deteriorate with successive generations, now. They are indistinguishable in quality from the original.

I talked to an attorney whose job in Wisconsin used to be to sue anybody using any Disney anything. Some guy would make a Mickey Mouse drawing for his kid's birthday party and if they spotted it would sue him. Not even a warning letter. Straight to court. Zero tolerance, and that's just for private use. I've heard McDonalds is the same way. 60 minutes showed them suing a Scottish family whose restaurant was named McDonalds. It had been there longer than the chain had existed. The owner was the Laird McDonald and head of the Clan McDonald. I don't recall where it wound up, if I ever even heard?