# Respecting copyright



## Joe Blow

Please do not infringe the copyright of others on ASF. 

I see a lot of people reproducing whole articles and/or not posting a link to or identifying the original source of quoted material.

The ASF code of conduct states:



> Aussie Stock Forums must not be used for any illegal activity, including the breach of copyright




If you are quoting another source you must do two things.

1. Not quote the entire article as this infringes copyright. Please only quote a  small portion of it (maximum 10%) as this constitues 'fair use' or 'fair dealing'. See here for more information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_dealing

2. *Always* include a link to the original article. If the article is not on the internet you must specifically refer to the publication (title and issue/date) from which it came.

Posts may be removed or quoted material shortened by myself or one of the site moderators if this rule is ignored.

Thank you all for your co-operation.


----------



## Trembling Hand

Joe Blow said:


> Posts may be removed or quoted material shortened by myself or one of the site moderators if this rule is ignored.




I think this would be a welcome move. Many times a thread just gets filled with repeat of what is freely available on Bloomberg or the like. Nothing wrong with quoting to draw attention to something or make a point but a lot of the time it adds nothing but space to be ignored. As well as the copyright issues. My  anyway.

I would certainly welcome this move.


----------



## son of baglimit

i on the other hand have a problem with this rule.

the posting of articles AND the source via the link provides those interested with an education not only on the particular stock, but also the sector, especially if your stock of interest is in a sector or sub sector not given much coverage in mainstream media....ie not financial, property, mining etc.

i feel if the whole article is relevant, post it, along with the relevant link, but obviously provide an edited version if the article is too broad.

i fear having posted this that my approach to posting will be savaged.

time will tell.


----------



## wayneL

son of baglimit said:


> i on the other hand have a problem with this rule.
> 
> the posting of articles AND the source via the link provides those interested with an education not only on the particular stock, but also the sector, especially if your stock of interest is in a sector or sub sector not given much coverage in mainstream media....ie not financial, property, mining etc.
> 
> i feel if the whole article is relevant, post it, along with the relevant link, but obviously provide an edited version if the article is too broad.
> 
> i fear having posted this that my approach to posting will be savaged.
> 
> time will tell.




SOB,

The thing is, if full articles are posted, the publisher may come after the forum and/or the poster concerned legally. None of us want that. It is purely to avoid any of us giving money to solicitors.


----------



## sails

Joe Blow said:


> ...If you are quoting another source you must do two things.
> 
> 1. Not quote the entire article as this infringes copyright. Please only quote a  small portion of it (maximum 20%) as this constitues 'fair use' or 'fair dealing'. See here for more information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_dealing
> 
> 2. *Always* include a link to the original article. If the article is not on the internet you must specifically refer to the publication (title and issue/date) from which it came...




Thanks for posting this, Joe.  Personally, I wasn't sure about copyright and have usually posted links only.  So it is good to know the rules...


----------



## Joe Blow

We will be getting tougher on flagrant copyright violations from this moment on. If you are reproducing copyright information on ASF from another source you must do so within the realms of the law.

You *must* only reproduce a small portion of the article (10% or one or two paragraphs maximum) and you *must* link to the original source.

We will now be actively removing posts that contain:


Copyrighted articles that are reproduced in full or beyond what is considered to be 'fair dealing'.
Excerpts of articles that contain no link to the original source.

Please report posts that are violating copyright law by using the 'Report a Post' function.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin

Joe Blow said:


> We will be getting tougher on flagrant copyright violations from this moment on. If you are reproducing copyright information on ASF from another source you must do so within the realms of the law.
> 
> You *must* only reproduce a small portion of the article (10% or one or two paragraphs maximum) and you *must* link to the original source.
> 
> We will now be actively removing posts that contain:
> 
> 
> Copyrighted articles that are reproduced in full or beyond what is considered to be 'fair dealing'.
> Excerpts of articles that contain no link to the original source.
> 
> Please respect the copyright of others.




Hi Joe,

I welcome these measures you are taking. 

The copyright world of the internet is a fuzzy minefield to those not legally conversed. Fair dealing is not as easily interpreted as one would think. As the internet itself is still developing I would like to see some straightforward easily understood and extremely easily available system of RULES for ordinary laymen, from the internet rulers so to speak. 

Regards
Snake


----------



## Joe Blow

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Hi Joe,
> 
> I welcome these measures you are taking.
> 
> The copyright world of the internet is a fuzzy minefield to those not legally conversed. Fair dealing is not as easily interpreted as one would think. As the internet itself is still developing I would like to see some straightforward easily understood and extremely easily available system of RULES for ordinary laymen, from the internet rulers so to speak.
> 
> Regards
> Snake




Thanks Snake.

Yes, the guidelines for the internet aren't quite as clear as I would like so a degree of caution is required when reproducing material on ASF that is sourced from other websites.

It is impossible for us to review every post on the forums so we appreciate any help in identifying posts that are in violation of copyright law so that we can deal with them ASAP.


----------



## GreatPig

It should also be noted that photos and cartoons are generally also copyrighted, and hotlinking to them is both a breach of copyright and considered bandwidth theft (unless expressly permitted).

But it's rather difficult to reproduce only 10% of a picture. 

GP


----------



## Smurf1976

I resent that it is necessary, it's just another symptom of too many lawyers and not enough commonsense IMO, but I acknowledge and accept that for ASF there is no alternative - don't post copyright material.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin

Joe,

Just a thought regarding the posting of charts on the forum. What are the copyright problems for posters using freely available charts and posting a screen shot to use in a post? Does ASF have a policy on this that doesn't require the poster getting permission from the provider?


----------



## Wysiwyg

Hi snake, noticed you have a beef about posting information on the internet.Why is that.Thanks.


----------



## Joe Blow

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Joe,
> 
> Just a thought regarding the posting of charts on the forum. What are the copyright problems for posters using freely available charts and posting a screen shot to use in a post? Does ASF have a policy on this that doesn't require the poster getting permission from the provider?




Hi Snake,

My understanding that it is okay to use screenshots of charts for discussion on forums like ASF as it is considered to be fair use under copyright law.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin

Joe Blow said:


> Hi Snake,
> 
> My understanding that it is okay to use screenshots of charts for discussion on forums like ASF as it is considered to be fair use under copyright law.



Thanks for the response Joe.

Yes, all of this is difficult to interpret at times. Some terms say: "you can use one copy for your own personal use" but what does that mean?  Perhaps the legalese could write a laymans copy for the majority. 

Cheers.


----------



## Joe Blow

This is still an issue that some people do not seem to be taking seriously. 

There are a few points that I want to make absolutely clear.


If you quote another source you *must* identify that source. If it's from the internet then a link will suffice. If it is an offline source then it must be identified by publication, name of article, author and page number. Posts with quotes from other sources that do not identify their source will be removed.

Please ensure that you separate the quoted part of your post from the rest of it. The best way of doing this is by using the 'quote' tags to identify the quoted part of your post: https://www.aussiestockforums.com/help/bb-codes#quote

Do not reproduce entire articles unless you have the permission of the copyright holder. If you do not then please only reproduce a small portion of the article and then supply a link to the entire article so those interested can click through and read it all.

Your co-operation in this matter is appreciated.


----------



## MrBurns

Here's the reponse from Crikey - 



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Monica Maric [mailto:mmaric@privatemedia.com.au]
> Sent: Friday, 13 February 2009 10:32 AM
> To:
> Subject: RE: copyright
> 
> 
> Hi there-
> 
> It is fine.  Go ahead with it.
> Apologies for the delay.
> 
> Cheers,
> monica maric|subscriptions coordinator & office administrator
> 
> crikey www.crikey.com.au
> Level 7, 22 William St  Melbourne, VIC, 3000
> phone: +61 3  8623 9900| fax: +61 3  8623 9975
> 
> Crikey - feisty, independent news and commentary - delivered daily.
> 
> Start a 2 Week Free Trial now: www.crikey.com.au/freetrial.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From:
> Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:45 PM
> To: Monica Maric
> Subject: RE: copyright
> 
> 
> No reply yet ?
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Monica Maric [mailto:mmaric@privatemedia.com.au]
> Sent: Wednesday, 4 February 2009 3:26 PM
> To:
> Subject: RE: copyright
> 
> 
> Hi there,
> 
> Thanks for your email.  I have forwarded your email on  - am just waiting on a reply.  Will let you know asap.
> 
> Cheers,
> monica maric|subscriptions coordinator & office administrator
> 
> crikey www.crikey.com.au
> Level 7, 22 William St  Melbourne, VIC, 3000
> phone: +61 3  8623 9900| fax: +61 3  8623 9975
> 
> Crikey - feisty, independent news and commentary - delivered daily.
> 
> Start a 2 Week Free Trial now: www.crikey.com.au/freetrial.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From:
> Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 3:15 PM
> To: Monica Maric
> Subject: copyright
> 
> 
> Hi Monica,
> 
> I'm a Crikey subscriber and as discussed I would like to reproduce some articles from the Crikey newsletter on the www.aussiestockforums.com
> web site, as they have a general discussion section.
> 
> I would perhaps post a couple of articles a week sometimes, depends if they are relevant to current discussion on the site.
> 
> I always give the source of the article as Crikey but do not want to infringe  on your copyright nor do Aussiestockforums therefore please confirm or otherwise if I am able to do this, I think it can only encourage subscribers to Crikey and spread the word a bit more.
> 
> Regards,


----------



## Joe Blow

Fair enough.


----------



## Joe Blow

Joe Blow said:


> We will be getting tougher on flagrant copyright violations from this moment on. If you are reproducing copyright information on ASF from another source you must do so within the realms of the law.
> 
> You *must* only reproduce a small portion of the article (10% or one or two paragraphs maximum) and you *must* link to the original source.
> 
> We will now be actively removing posts that contain:
> 
> 
> Copyrighted articles that are reproduced in full or beyond what is considered to be 'fair dealing'.
> Excerpts of articles that contain no link to the original source.
> 
> Please report posts that are violating copyright law by using the 'Report a Post' function.




Just bumping this thread to remind everyone about their responsibilities when it comes to respecting the copyright of others. If you are posting material that is sourced from elsewhere on the internet it is imperative that:


You only reproduce a small amount of the source material in your post on ASF, unless the author has indicated that the material may be freely reproduced.
You link to the original source material so that others can read the rest of the article/information and assess the quality/reliability of the source.
You do not post any material (even an excerpt) from subscriber only newsletters. This information is intended for the newsletter subscribers only.

Thank you all for your attention and your co-operation.


----------



## Trembling Hand

Joe Blow said:


> Just bumping this thread to remind everyone about their responsibilities when it comes to respecting the copyright of others. If you are posting material that is sourced from elsewhere on the internet it is imperative that:




I reckon you are going to need to do more than bumping a thread from time to time.

Something more along the lines of a pop window that explains it on log in, maybe every six months to remind people, and getting them to acknowledge cutting and pasting 2000 words from gurunewsletter.com anit no good 

just a thought while flippin through the forum today


----------



## Joe Blow

Trembling Hand said:


> I reckon you are going to need to do more than bumping a thread from time to time.
> 
> Something more along the lines of a pop window that explains it on log in, maybe every six months to remind people, and getting them to acknowledge cutting and pasting 2000 words from gurunewsletter.com anit no good
> 
> just a thought while flippin through the forum today




Yes, sadly it is a never ending struggle to get some people to abide by the site rules. 

The moderators and I can only peruse so many posts and unfortunately there is quite a bit that does get by us. I would ask anybody who notices copyright being violated to please report the post so we can act as quickly as possible and remove it. The assistance of ASF members in helping us to identify posts that are in violation of site rules is invaluable and we appreciate any help that is offered.


----------



## noirua

A link at Wikipedia on copyright laws:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright

The laws of Australia and the UK are fairly similar on copyright law, but the situation is quite different in very many other countries.
I know that the USA Federal law on referencing another website or link for information, does not allow a copyright infringement to be brought against a citizen of the United States or any person doing so from the United States. 
Another website may have broken copyright law and placing a link as such on an Australian bulletin board would break the law in Australia but no case could be taken against a citizen of the United States.


----------



## noirua

Copyright and Fair Use: Stanford
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter6/index.html


----------



## noirua

noirua said:


> A link at Wikipedia on copyright laws:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright
> 
> The laws of Australia and the UK are fairly similar on copyright law, but the situation is quite different in very many other countries.
> I know that the USA Federal law on referencing another website or link for information, does not allow a copyright infringement to be brought against a citizen of the United States or any person doing so from the United States.
> Another website may have broken copyright law and placing a link as such on an Australian bulletin board would break the law in Australia but no case could be taken against a citizen of the United States.




US Court's libel decision in 2003: http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2003/06/59424


----------



## Joe Blow

Joe Blow said:


> Just bumping this thread to remind everyone about their responsibilities when it comes to respecting the copyright of others. If you are posting material that is sourced from elsewhere on the internet it is imperative that:
> 
> 
> You only reproduce a small amount of the source material in your post on ASF, unless the author has indicated that the material may be freely reproduced.
> You link to the original source material so that others can read the rest of the article/information and assess the quality/reliability of the source.
> You do not post any material (even an excerpt) from subscriber only newsletters. This information is intended for the newsletter subscribers only.
> 
> Thank you all for your attention and your co-operation.




A reminder to all about their responsibility to abide by copyright law.

We are getting tough on this now, so please familiarise yourself with the rules I have detailed in the quoted part of this post.

Thank you.


----------



## Miner

Joe Blow said:


> A reminder to all about their responsibility to abide by copyright law.
> 
> We are getting tough on this now, so please familiarise yourself with the rules I have detailed in the quoted part of this post.
> 
> Thank you.




Thanks Joe for the useful reminder. 

I have sent few PM on this issue in the past. I would like to get educated to understand the fine line between breach of copyright issues. Punishing some one for breack will be fine but wrongly punishing could be risky. So we need to understand the copyright issue correctly.

Could you please enlighten with more guidelines about the quantification of small. 5  pages of 100 page could be small (5%) and 100 words from 500 words article could be very big (20%).

Further considering Eureka report publishes several newsletter extracts including Marcus newsletter as an extract (probably under some contract only). If Joe Blogg or Mary Anne reports the same extract in ASF - should it be a violation of copyright ? (It is imperative the source will be quoted) 

Eureka report often sends free newsletters with specific article. That becomes a freebie. So publishing from that article should not be a breach of privilege. same applies for Intelligent Investor, Charles Aitken, Marcus   and few other newsletters when offering freebies. 

West Australian newspaper publishes extract from newsletters in their newspaper. Should extract from it will be a copyright breach. 

ASF publishes Bull Newsletter in its forum. If Some one copies the part of such Bull Newsletter - would it be a violation of copyright ? (It is imperative that source will be quoted)

It will be very nice of you to provide a further clarification on the above matter and what YOU think as a breack of copyright from ASF perspective. 

Regards


----------



## Joe Blow

Miner said:


> Thanks Joe for the useful reminder.
> 
> I have sent few PM on this issue in the past. I would like to get educated to understand the fine line between breach of copyright issues. Punishing some one for breack will be fine but wrongly punishing could be risky. So we need to understand the copyright issue correctly.
> 
> Could you please enlighten with more guidelines about the quantification of small. 5  pages of 100 page could be small (5%) and 100 words from 500 words article could be very big (20%).




This is the part of the Australian Copyright Council's website that deals with the use of copyright material for "criticism or review": http://www.copyright.org.au/information/cit028/wp0061

It is not specific on the amount that can be used, only stating that the use should be "fair". As far as I'm concerned, that means enough of the article to establish what it is about. I would imagine a couple of short paragraphs should suffice.

It goes onto say that the title and author of the work should be acknowledged. That's fair enough. There should also be a link to the original source so others can review the rest of the article and evaluate the quality/reliability of the source. If it is not available on the web, the publication it came from and the issue number should be cited.



Miner said:


> Further considering Eureka report publishes several newsletter extracts including Marcus newsletter as an extract (probably under some contract only). If Joe Blogg or Mary Anne reports the same extract in ASF - should it be a violation of copyright ? (It is imperative the source will be quoted)




I ask that people check every website they plan to quote material from for copyright notices. There are some subscriber only newsletters that do not allow any of their material to be reproduced, and rightly so. If people can get it for free, why would anyone subscribe?

If you are unsure if you are allowed to reproduce something, or how much you are allowed to reproduce, I would send a quick email to the copyright owner and ask for clarification.



Miner said:


> Eureka report often sends free newsletters with specific article. That becomes a freebie. So publishing from that article should not be a breach of privilege. same applies for Intelligent Investor, Charles Aitken, Marcus   and few other newsletters when offering freebies.




Free newsletters sent via email will more than likely contain a copyright notice of some kind at the end of the email. If it doesn't, I would check with the copyright owner for clarification.



Miner said:


> ASF publishes Bull Newsletter in its forum. If Some one copies the part of such Bull Newsletter - would it be a violation of copyright ? (It is imperative that source will be quoted)




The Bull has given ASF permission to use its RSS feed for the purpose of providing market news to ASF members. However, articles at The Bull are subject to the same copyright restrictions as any other copyright material available on the internet and the same rules should be applied.



Miner said:


> It will be very nice of you to provide a further clarification on the above matter and what YOU think as a breack of copyright from ASF perspective.




I hope my post has made things a bit clearer.


----------



## Miner

Joe Blow said:


> This is the part of the Australian Copyright Council's website that deals with the use of copyright material for "criticism or review": http://www.copyright.org.au/information/cit028/wp0061
> 
> It is not specific on the amount that can be used, only stating that the use should be "fair". As far as I'm concerned, that means enough of the article to establish what it is about. I would imagine a couple of short paragraphs should suffice.
> 
> It goes onto say that the title and author of the work should be acknowledged. That's fair enough. There should also be a link to the original source so others can review the rest of the article and evaluate the quality/reliability of the source. If it is not available on the web, the publication it came from and the issue number should be cited.
> 
> 
> 
> I ask that people check every website they plan to quote material from for copyright notices. There are some subscriber only newsletters that do not allow any of their material to be reproduced, and rightly so. If people can get it for free, why would anyone subscribe?
> 
> If you are unsure if you are allowed to reproduce something, or how much you are allowed to reproduce, I would send a quick email to the copyright owner and ask for clarification.
> 
> 
> 
> Free newsletters sent via email will more than likely contain a copyright notice of some kind at the end of the email. If it doesn't, I would check with the copyright owner for clarification.
> 
> 
> 
> The Bull has given ASF permission to use its RSS feed for the purpose of providing market news to ASF members. However, articles at The Bull are subject to the same copyright restrictions as any other copyright material available on the internet and the same rules should be applied.
> 
> 
> 
> I hope my post has made things a bit clearer.




In short Joe

Thanks for your time to go through the issues raised and responses them clearly.
Good response and thanks a lot

Regards


----------



## Tatts

Joe Blow said:


> This is the part of the Australian Copyright Council's website that deals with the use of copyright material for "criticism or review":
> 
> It is not specific on the amount that can be used, only stating that the use should be "fair". As far as I'm concerned, that means enough of the article to establish what it is about. I would imagine a couple of short paragraphs should suffice.




As far as i know it is generally considered that 10% is deemed to be 'fair use' although it may be more or less depending on what part is used.
If the whole article is gearing up to one specific point and you take that main point it may be considered too much but on the other hand you may use 30% of the article and not use the main purpose of it and that could be acceptable.

I was looking at this a while ago for work and that was what i came up with. Hope that helps?


----------



## Joe Blow

Joe Blow said:


> This is still an issue that some people do not seem to be taking seriously.
> 
> There are a few points that I want to make absolutely clear.
> 
> 
> If you quote another source you *must* identify that source. If it's from the internet then a link will suffice. If it is an offline source then it must be identified by publication, name of article, author and page number. Posts with quotes from other sources that do not identify their source will be removed.
> 
> Please ensure that you separate the quoted part of your post from the rest of it. The best way of doing this is by using the 'quote' tags to identify the quoted part of your post: https://www.aussiestockforums.com/help/bb-codes#quote
> 
> Do not reproduce entire articles unless you have the permission of the copyright holder. If you do not then please only reproduce a small portion of the article and then supply a link to the entire article so those interested can click through and read it all.
> 
> Your co-operation in this matter is appreciated.




Just a reminder about respecting the copyright of others. It's not okay to reproduce entire articles from elsewhere on the internet unless you have permission from the copyright holder.

Please use the guidelines I have quoted above as a guide for quoting from other sources.


----------



## Joe Blow

Joe Blow said:


> Just bumping this thread to remind everyone about their responsibilities when it comes to respecting the copyright of others. If you are posting material that is sourced from elsewhere on the internet it is imperative that:
> 
> 
> You only reproduce a small amount of the source material in your post on ASF, unless the author has indicated that the material may be freely reproduced.
> You link to the original source material so that others can read the rest of the article/information and assess the quality/reliability of the source.
> You do not post any material (even an excerpt) from subscriber only newsletters. This information is intended for the newsletter subscribers only.
> 
> Thank you all for your attention and your co-operation.




I am now introducing a zero tolerance policy with regard to copyright infringement on ASF. You *may not* reproduce entire copyrighted articles from other websites. Posts that violate copyright will be removed as soon as they are identified and an infraction will be issued. From this point forward there will be no warnings.

Serial offenders will have their ASF accounts suspended.


----------



## Joe Blow

Joe Blow said:


> Just bumping this thread to remind everyone about their responsibilities when it comes to respecting the copyright of others. If you are posting material that is sourced from elsewhere on the internet it is imperative that:
> 
> 
> You only reproduce a small amount of the source material in your post on ASF, unless the author has indicated that the material may be freely reproduced.
> You link to the original source material so that others can read the rest of the article/information and assess the quality/reliability of the source.
> You do not post any material (even an excerpt) from subscriber only newsletters. This information is intended for the newsletter subscribers only.
> 
> Thank you all for your attention and your co-operation.




Please respect the copyright of others and do not reproduce copyrighted articles in full on ASF. The above guidelines must be adhered to at all times.


----------



## Joe Blow

Joe Blow said:


> Just bumping this thread to remind everyone about their responsibilities when it comes to respecting the copyright of others. If you are posting material that is sourced from elsewhere on the internet it is imperative that:
> 
> 
> You only reproduce a small amount of the source material in your post on ASF, unless the author has indicated that the material may be freely reproduced.
> You link to the original source material so that others can read the rest of the article/information and assess the quality/reliability of the source.
> You do not post any material (even an excerpt) from subscriber only newsletters. This information is intended for the newsletter subscribers only.
> 
> Thank you all for your attention and your co-operation.




It seems like another reminder is overdue. 

Please respect the copyright of others and *always identify your source and link to it if possible*.


----------



## Joe Blow

Joe Blow said:


> Just bumping this thread to remind everyone about their responsibilities when it comes to respecting the copyright of others. If you are posting material that is sourced from elsewhere on the internet it is imperative that:
> 
> 
> You only reproduce a small amount of the source material in your post on ASF, unless the author has indicated that the material may be freely reproduced.
> You link to the original source material so that others can read the rest of the article/information and assess the quality/reliability of the source.
> You do not post any material (even an excerpt) from subscriber only newsletters. This information is intended for the newsletter subscribers only.
> 
> Thank you all for your attention and your co-operation.




Sadly, it seems that it is time for another reminder as incidents of copyright infringement here at ASF are on the increase again.

You are not entitled, under *any* circumstances, to reproduce an entire copyrighted article in a post here at ASF. This includes news reports. You are allowed to reproduce a small portion only, usually a few short paragraphs. You *must* acknowledge the title and author of the article and provide a link to the original source material. If a link to the source is not available (i.e it is from a printed publication) you must quote the publication name, date of publication and pages number(s).

Recently, I have been editing infringing posts to comply with these guidelines but it seems I will now be forced to remove posts in their entirety and issue infractions.

Please respect the copyright of others.


----------



## Miner

Joe Blow said:


> Sadly, it seems that it is time for another reminder as incidents of copyright infringement here at ASF are on the increase again.
> 
> You are not entitled, under *any* circumstances, to reproduce an entire copyrighted article in a post here at ASF. This includes news reports. You are allowed to reproduce a small portion only, usually a few short paragraphs. You *must* acknowledge the title and author of the article and provide a link to the original source material. If a link to the source is not available (i.e it is from a printed publication) you must quote the publication name, date of publication and pages number(s).
> 
> Recently, I have been editing infringing posts to comply with these guidelines but it seems I will now be forced to remove posts in their entirety and issue infractions.
> 
> Please respect the copyright of others.




Dear Joe

As always I fully agree with the provision to protect one's  copyright from legal and ethical perspective as well.

Whereas you have been rightfully advocating the importance of copyright issue for a long time.

Could I please make some suggestions considering not everyone possibly reads this thread and hence taking full benefits of the posting on this thread.

That a one line popout system for every posting on each thread be included :

"_I acknowledge my posting has not violated the copyright provision and have agreed to abide by it - bla bla _" and click OK. It is similar to the pop up window when placing an order from Commsec site. 

To start with it may be annoying to some but then it absolves ASF from the obligations of copyright violation by a poster and brings some higher level of accountability for each of us while posting on a thread. Personally it brings some decorum and conformance to a good system as well. 

regards


----------



## Joe Blow

Miner said:


> Dear Joe
> 
> As always I fully agree with the provision to protect one's  copyright from legal and ethical perspective as well.
> 
> Whereas you have been rightfully advocating the importance of copyright issue for a long time.
> 
> Could I please make some suggestions considering not everyone possibly reads this thread and hence taking full benefits of the posting on this thread.
> 
> That a one line popout system for every posting on each thread be included :
> 
> "_I acknowledge my posting has not violated the copyright provision and have agreed to abide by it - bla bla _" and click OK. It is similar to the pop up window when placing an order from Commsec site.
> 
> To start with it may be annoying to some but then it absolves ASF from the obligations of copyright violation by a poster and brings some higher level of accountability for each of us while posting on a thread. Personally it brings some decorum and conformance to a good system as well.
> 
> regards




Hi Miner,

Many thanks for your suggestion!

I have added it to the list of things to do and will hopefully introduce something like this in the future.


----------



## Joe Blow

Joe Blow said:


> Just bumping this thread to remind everyone about their responsibilities when it comes to respecting the copyright of others. If you are posting material that is sourced from elsewhere on the internet it is imperative that:
> 
> 
> You only reproduce a small amount of the source material in your post on ASF, unless the author has indicated that the material may be freely reproduced.
> You link to the original source material so that others can read the rest of the article/information and assess the quality/reliability of the source.
> You do not post any material (even an excerpt) from subscriber only newsletters. This information is intended for the newsletter subscribers only.
> 
> Thank you all for your attention and your co-operation.




Another reminder that it is not permitted to reproduce entire articles from other sources here at ASF, unless you have the written permission of the copyright holder.

In accordance with Australian copyright regulations, only a small portion of any copyrighted work my be reproduced elsewhere. This includes articles frow news websites. A link must be provided to the original source material, if it is available online.

Thank you for your co-operation.


----------



## Joe Blow

Just a reminder that it is not permitted to reproduce entire copyrighted articles from other websites here at ASF. I have noticed that this is becoming more common, especially with the proliferation of news website paywalls, where you need to register or become a paying member to access the website's content.

However, our policy remains the same due to our obligation to abide by the relevant copyright regulations.

In short, these are the rules:

You must only reproduce a small amount (a few paragraphs at most) of any copyrighted source material in posts here at ASF, unless the author has indicated that the material may be freely reproduced.
You must link to the original source material so that others can read the rest of the article/information and assess the quality/reliability of the source.
You must not post any material (even an excerpt) from subscriber only newsletters. This information is intended for the newsletter subscribers only.
It is, however, permissible to summarise or paraphrase the content in your own words.

Your co-operation in this matter is appreciated.


----------



## Joe Blow

I just want to make one other quick point with regard to quoting from other sources.

When quoting from another source, please make it clear that you are referencing another source so others do not think that what you are posting is your original content. There are two ways to do this:

1. Enclose the quoted section of your post in "QUOTE" tags as described here. For additional information about these tags, please refer to this thread that I started a number of years ago that describes in detail how they are used: https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2737
2. Enclose the quoted section of your post in quotation marks.

When quoting from another source, it is important to make it clear to others that the content is not your own. Always be sure to post a link to the original source material immediately after the quoted section of your post.


----------

