One I've used, but always with attribution when talking about putting family trees online: "I use mine for what Randy Seaver calls 'cousin bait.'" I love that phrase, but I've never separated it yet from Randy's name. On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 6:12 PM, eshown <eshown@comcast.net> wrote: > Margie wrote: > > My question is: when does a phrase become copyrighted? A pinball approach > I have heard attributed to other areas of life, a fan club is when a group > of people follow someone for some reason. So by adding the word "principle" > makes it copyrighted? or using the word fan as an acronym makes it > copyrighted, or using quotes? > > Margie, > > You are obviously treading carefully. That is a good approach for every > professional to take. When we are dealing with CONCEPTS, the issue is not > copyright. The issue is plagiarism. As Philip put it, the issue is 'moral' > rather than legal. > > (I don't know if you've seen it or not but, if you haven't, the subject of > EE's current QuickLesson 15: Plagiarism and the Five 'Copywrongs' of > Historical Writing" <www.EvidenceExplained.com> might help to clarify > these > issues for you.) > > Giving credit where due CAN get cumbersome. In a presentation in which you > use, say, the pinball concept that you've read about in Dear Myrt's blog, > you might introduce your discussion by saying something like, "Pat > Richley-Erickson, who blogs as Dear Myrtle, has developed a wonderful > concept that we can apply to this type of problem. . . ." Then you would > proceed to *briefly* summarize her ideas and then *at length* develop your > own. You would also want to place, on your handout, a full citation to the > online column in which Pat detailed her concept. > > You also mentioned developing something of your own that's based on my "FAN > Club Principle" in that same presentation. As you also noted, you > conscientiously contacted me for permission. (Thank you. :) > > Taking these two in tandem, I also sense in your query some puzzlement over > just how far one has to take this 'get permission' stuff. If we make a > presentation and we have to tell the group, "Pat Richley-Ericson developed > this concept ... ESM developed this concept, and the Board for > Certification > developed this other concept," then that could leave us, as a speaker, > feeling uncomfortable about how often we are having to make an attribution. > That, too, is a good thing. If we feel that we are having to make an awful > lot of attributions in our presentation, then our inner-self is likely > telling us that we need to use fewer ideas from other speakers and use more > material of our own development. > > An occasional exception to the last point might be an overtly "derivative" > presentation entitled: "The 5 Hottest Ideas in Genealogical Research: > Pinballs, FAN Clubs, GPS, Whatever & Yada Yada!" In this case, you would > logically present each hot idea, identify the person or agency who > developed > it, and then use your expertise to develop each point in your own way. > > Hope this helps. > > Elizabeth > --------------------------------------------- > Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FASG > www.HistoricPathways.com > www.EvidenceExplained.com > & for daily tips on records and record usage: > www.Facebook.com/EvidenceExplained > > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive > environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to > professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >