Is this plagiarism?

In Germany you are allowed to quote one sentence or something like it and there has to be a relation to your own work (like the cartoon).

I think it is the same in other countries.

I think half of the article is to much.

Have a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation

As far as I am aware if you fully credit the source using correct web referencing then you are OK.

You will only run into problems if you copy without giving full credit and do not give a link to the source.

That said, I am no expert.

You all are confusing things. Assuming you are in the United States, plagiarism isnt against the law. However infringing on a copyright is another thing …

1. Plagiarism: Passing content off as your own work.

2. Copyright violation: Nicking someone else’s content against their wishes, regardless of whether or not you provide attribution (in an attempt not to plagiarize, for example).
—
As for what the OP asked, chances are youre violating a copyright policy, take for example:

Reuters Copyright:

All rights reserved. Users may download and print extracts of content from this website for their own personal and non-commercial use only. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. …

Most “news” sites have a similar policy: printing = yes, redisplaying = no.

Once youve attributed the source, you’re obviously not plagiarizing. You are probably, however, committing a copyright infringement.

—

I am not debating whether its done, or should be allowed, ethics (yadda yadda) especially as they relate to “news” sites like Reuters… I’m just answering the OP’s question in the simplest terms, with a little clarification.

Thanks for your feedback guys. I think I understand it better now

Tezzer

I’d actually like to clarify what whooami said:

Plagiarism is passing off someone else’s work as your own, but it’s more of an academic question… it only seems to come up at school and in writing professions — and in those professions it’s usually resolved by the guilty being fired, losing their contract, etc.

Copyright infringement is the republishing or reuse of someone else’s intellectual property, and there are laws against it, however they are tort laws so you need to be sued by someone in order for there to be a problem.

What you’re describing sounds as though you would have fair use on your side, but in general with the internet and copyright it’s more important for the individual to avoid a lawsuit than to actually be right, since most people don’t have the money to enter protracted legal battles with corporations.

If you’re nervous, I would recommend either

• Reducing the amount of text you’re quoting, as the amount copied is an important factor in determining whether or not a use is fair use
• Better yet, link to the article with your own summary. Depending on the tone you’re going for in your posts (and with the cartoon) this may be a better editorial strategy for you anyway
• The most conservative would be to simply link and post the cartoon, hoping that the ambiguity that could creep in would be compelling for your readers

I would go the second route myself, but it depends on exactly what you’re doing and what country you’re in (and what country the newspaper is in, frankly).

Here is a better explaination of Fair Use than Wikipedia could ever possibly dream up:

Fair use or fair practice is utilization of a portion of a copyrighted work “as is” for purposes of parody, news reporting, research and education about such copyrighted work without the permission of the author. Use of copyrighted works, or portions thereof, for any other purpose is not deemed fair use, so be careful! That includes copying text or scanning pictures from postcards, magazines, books or any other work. Scanning a photo of the Amazon Forest printed in National Geographic and using it without permission on your personal web site about your family trip to South America will most likely not be considered as fair use. However, if you republished the photo on your site to comment on the photo as it was published in National Geographic, this would most likely be considered fair use. You still have to credit your source by naming the author of the work on the same page. In any event, it is always safer to take the time and effort to contact the owner and request permission to use the owner’s work, and more likely than not the owner will be very appreciative and give you a favorable response.