Hi, all
I know this matter is mostly settled, but this is a topic I have a lot
of interest in, so, if everyone already knows all this, I thank you for
the opportunity to articulate it for myself, and sorry if I'm a little
verbose.
The way to go would have to be reporting on the facts that you have
learned from other sources, rather than reading the other sources. Since
you're not a journalist, you wouldn't even have to fact-check them. If
the article includes quotes, you could read some quotes, but you'd have
to avoid quoting the article itself. Essentially the Oh No News can't be
a substitute for reading these particular articles, in the sense that
listening to you read them in the oh no news shows does the same thing
as reading the articles myself. It can serve as a substitute for
learning about the same facts, but if I wanted to read about them in
that publication, I would still have to go and read it. There are many
newsletters nowadays that cover a variety of things by basically
paraphrasing other publications to propagate the facts. Also, pretty
much anytime there is a big investigative news story, one publication
breaks it and others report it based on what they learned from that
first publication, after some fact-checking, perhaps. In some cases, I
think you could quote the other publication, especially if it is an
opinion or analysis piece, because that can be said to be a newsworthy
fact. However, again, your piece can't be a viable replacement for the
piece you're quoting, so you'd have to also tell us why you're quoting
what Krebs wrote, by adding your own analysis or perspective, it can't
be just because it was good. For example, you could report on a certain
breach, in your own words, based on what you've learned from another
article, and then you could quote something that Brian Krebs wrote on
his blog about it, if there's some reason what he said and the fact that
he said it is itself worthy of reporting on, rather than reporting on
the fact via his words. Again, I think the essential thing is that you
can't make the oh no news into a replacement for reading the articles
you read on the show.
Therefore, since the articles you read are usually reporting on facts,
it should be perfectly feasible to continue doing the oh no news shows
by just sticking with the facts and saying them in your own words, and
just linking to your sources in your shownotes or giving them a shout
out. :)
My understanding of this is based on reading about the US fair use
doctrine, which I know doesn't necessarily have analogues everywhere,
but I do think it reflects a pretty universal understanding of author's
rights, and sometimes I think the US were just the only country in the
world that needed to codify fair use, being the world's most litigious
society. Nevertheless, I welcome any corrections to what I wrote above.
—dnt
On 5/19/23 14:17, Ken Fallon wrote:
This is the issue I posted on the HPR channel.
https://matrix.to/#/#hpr:matrix.org
<quote>
/@SGOTI: While I do personally love your news shows, as a janitor I
have a few concerns about carrying them on HPR.//
//
//The shows represent a problem as they are reporting/quoting on
someone else's copyrighted work. Therefore it represents a grey area
as to if it can be released under Creative Commons or not. We require
that "you have permission to redistribute your show in its entirety",
https://hackerpublicradio.org/stuff_you_need_to_know.php#permission.
While some jurisdictions may allow commenting on/quoting/referencing
on other peoples work, some also do not - so we are opting for
certainty.//
//
//Also, we have had experience with two other news show series on HPR
in the past. One by finux which petered out, and the other by Talk
Geek to Me. That show was syndicated, and was removed from HPR
following discussions on the Mail List. It prompted the rule
https://hackerpublicradio.org/stuff_you_need_to_know.php#syndication.
At the time there were questions as to the long term value of these
shows, as most of our shows get ½ of their audience in the long tail
(way after they are aired), and how well the fit in with the idea of a
community podcast dedicated to sharing knowledge.//
//
//Opinions may have changed over time, so I would suggest that if you
are intending on doing an news show you should contact the mail list
for community approval./
</quote>
The issue about syndication does not apply here, I was pointing out
other issues with news shows that arose during the discussions. Sorry
for any misunderstanding.
I cannot copy and paste the discussion been held on the matrix channel
without getting everyone's permission individually. So I've asked for
the discussions to be held here.
They make the point that Wikipedia quote non free articles, but in
their case they use their own copy to refer to the factual event.
While the news shows here are copying the sites content verbatim.
While I may not agree, there is a growing belief that news stories
need to be paid for:
- https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56101859 Google to pay Murdoch's
News Corporation for stories
- https://gizmodo.com/google-news-pay-sites-facebook-eu-revenue-1848911440
-
https://www.investopedia.com/microsoft-msft-believes-tech-giants-should-pay-for-news-5112432
On 2023-05-19 16:30, Yung Lyun wrote:
Hello HPR Community.
I’m requesting assistance from the HPR community. A show I produce
and upload to HPR must be paused until we have the communities input;
nothing too bad just need more input before continuing.
First, I create and release the “Oh No! News” on HPR. It has been
brought to my attention that the shows content requires further
review and must be changed to comply with HPR’s community guidelines
(https://hackerpublicradio.org/stuff_you_need_to_know.php#permission).
Some of the shows contain direct quotes and **not** all jurisdictions
support “fair use”. This is a flaw/failure on my part and **if** the
show is allowed to continue, it must be brought inline with HPR
community guidelines.
Secondly, syndication concerns must be addressed
(https://hackerpublicradio.org/stuff_you_need_to_know.php#syndication).
When I created the HPR News, now the “Oh No! News”, I did **not**
considered syndication; I had no interest. Let me be very clear, at
**NO** point do I plan to seek syndication; I’m not interested. The
“Oh No! News” was/is created for the HPR community as a product we
can share, enjoy, and participate in without any limits. It is my way
of “giving back” to the community that has provided loads of
information and entertainment for me. I’ll be releasing a show with
more information on the subject soon.
Last, If it must go, then let it go. I’ve enjoyed creating the “Oh
No! News”, but I enjoy HPR more. If the show threatens the community
or isn’t accepted by the community I have no problem letting it go.
No decisions have been made and this is a call for all members of the
HPR community to weigh in on the matter. I ask that you voice your
concerns and/or provide any feedback at your earliest convenience.
Thanks,
SGOTI (Some Guy On The Internet).
--
Regards,
Ken Fallon (PA7KEN,G5KEN)
https://kenfallon.com
https://hackerpublicradio.org/hosts/ken_fallon
_______________________________________________
Hpr mailing list
Hpr@hackerpublicradio.org
http://hackerpublicradio.org/mailman/listinfo/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org
_______________________________________________
Hpr mailing list
Hpr@hackerpublicradio.org
http://hackerpublicradio.org/mailman/listinfo/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org
