Poetry Reposting: Is It Copyright Violation?

I intended to make a video blog for this post, but 20-something takes later, I could never get a good clip that didn't have me garbling my words every other sentence, so I gave up on it. Maybe I'll get one out tomorrow.

Today, I want to talk about an interesting phenomenon I've observed since I started posting my poetry here on my blog. I've mentioned before how StumbleUpon brought thousands of visitors to my poem How to Greet Death. After a few months, I started noticing that my site was receiving backlinks from a number of different blogs and Tumblr accounts, and when I followed those backlinks to see where my traffic was coming from, I discovered something: people were taking my poem, copying it, and posting it on their own blogs.

Initially, I was annoyed. People were taking my content and posting it to pad their own sites, and they were doing it without permission. For most bloggers, that kind of thing can be bad news-- when the same content appears on dozens of different websites, Google's been known to penalize that content's rankings, and that can cost a blogger traffic and (potentially) money.

But Are Poetry Reposters The Same As Content Thieves?

After my kneejerk reaction passed, though, I took a closer look. Everyone who copied the poem credited it, and 9 out of 10 of them provided a link to my website. Poems never rank well on search engines anyway, since they typically lack the keyword density necessary to reach the top spots, so having my content duplicated wasn't likely to harm my rankings much, and out of 23 reposts (that I've identified), 21 of them provided one-way links to my site. I still receive a reasonable amount of traffic from those links, and I didn't have to do anything to get them.

On the other hand, people who read my poetry on another site don't contribute to my ad revenue, and they aren't likely to purchase MP3s or do any of the supportive things that my direct visitors do, so it's debatable whether or not those reposts help or hinder my efforts. I think, in the end, they mostly break even.

Reposting Is, Technically, A Copyright Violation

In all technicality, everyone (with the exception of one polite blogger) who reposted my poem has committed copyright violation, since they didn't seek permission before doing so. If I were anal about such things, I suppose I could pursue legal methods to get those posts removed -- either through DMCA notices or through contacting the reposters' hosts or ISPs. But going through all that takes a lot of time and energy -- time and energy that would be better spent writing new poetry, promoting my site, and building connections with readers and other poetry bloggers.

Like it or not, anything you post online has a chance of being copied and reproduced elsewhere. That goes for any type of content, really, including blog posts, poetry, pictures, video, fiction works, and more, and there's usually not too much you can do about it. As always, if you're particularly protective of your copyrights, make sure your work never hits the Internet.

Publication Concerns

The biggest problem with reposters is that they make it marginally more difficult to get a poem published. A fair number of poetry journals will accept previously published work (and poetry blogs often count for that "previously published" moniker), but it's not uncommon for journals to ask you to remove the original post before your poem appears in their journal -- when the poem has been distributed to dozens of blogs, it's nigh impossible to get those posts removed, and that could, theoretically, hurt your chances of getting the poem published.

Of course, that's assuming you're actually planning on submitting the poem in question for publication. Like most of the poems published on this blog, How to Greet Death will probably never appear in a published work (at least not one I haven't produced myself), unless a publisher contacts me directly to ask if they can use it -- the poems I do submit to literary journals and anthologies are typically poems that have never been publicly released.

So What Do You Do About Reposters?

In the end, I decided to modify my Site Policies to allow reposting. Previously, the policies stated that you had to seek my permission before reproducing my poetry, but since people were doing it anyway without permission, I decided to just go ahead and make it official. Of course, my policies still include caveats to protect my financial interests. I also set up Google Alerts for a few key phrases (such as my name, and poem titles), so I receive an email notification whenever someone reposts one of my poems -- it's not a foolproof method, because Google Alerts misses some content, but it catches most of them.

So what do you think? If you're a poet, have you ever found one of your poems reposted without your permission? If so, how did you deal with it? If you aren't a poet, what's your opinion on the subject? Leave your thoughts in the comments.

Posted Sep 6, 2010 by Gabriel


matt (not verified)
matt's picture

It is Copyright violation if you reserve those rights, but your choice to pursue. You might enjoy watching Larry Lessig's presentation at TED. Common-sense does seem to trump copyright law in the case of re-posting content. Especially if one gets link-backs and proper credit. I think of the later as mandatory. http://www.ted.com/talks/larry_lessig_says_the_law_is_strangling_creativ...

As for harming ad revenue, it's likely negligible. The idea of putting advertisement beside poetry opens up a can of worms. Where do we stop? Do we begin selling product placement within our poems?

Greet death
With your hands in your Dockers®,
Slouched back, cool,
Collected, and confident.
Wear a hint of a grin
And a dash of Giorgio Armani.

My personal opinion-- is that preferable to ads, is the model offered up by Radiohead's In Rainbows album-- where MP3 content is offered for whatever amount it's worth to someone. $0 - $50,000, right? Or-- make a minimum donation for a physical product, but give the user the opportunity to pay more if they wish. It's a bit like putting an empty coffee can down in front of you on the street while you read your poetry or play your guitar. Most people will stop, listen, pay nothing, and walk on. Some will throw a few cents and others will throw a few bucks. Great. But touch the right person and they might write you a check and feel welcome to do so because of the empty coffee can's presence. Or perhaps better yet, one of those that walked away without giving you anything, will remember you, be inspired, influenced, or somehow contribute to the world because of the experience. (Sorry for turning Zen there.) In the end, the most important thing might be for the richest party walking away to be culture. And that is why I believe that freely re-posting content is essential to the artist, writer, or otherwise. Finances be damned! It's great to have self-interests, but at the end of the day, why write?

Good article. Thanks.

Gabriel
Gabriel's picture
Posts:

You bring up a lot of good points, Matt, and for the most part, I agree. I don't stick contextual ads here on my site -- not only because they wouldn't do well, but because the idea of product placement doesn't mesh well with poetry.

The ads I do have on this site are Project Wonderful ads that function on an auction-style system, and the vast majority of my advertisers are other independent writers and artists. I see it more as a chance to help those artists get a little more exposure with little effort on my part and negligible (usually a few cents a day) cost on their part.

I think the model Radiohead used is a good one, and, as you said, it's essentially the busker's model -- put your content (whatever it may be) out there and hope enough someones throw enough money in the hat for you to pull a bit of a profit. Unfortunately, it's not a very steady model, so I think it's good for artists to supplement it with other income sources -- if your donations (or tips or reader gifts or whatever term you want to use) dry up, you still have something to fall back on.

Bringing all this back to the topic of reposters -- I think the best way to handle them is to welcome them with open arms, and to help them out. Google Alerts let me know whenever someone reposts my content, and I can check to see that they're attributing and linking properly, and it's a great opportunity to email someone who enjoys your content and develop a stronger artist-patron relationship.

By using this site, you agree to abide by the Site Policies.
This website © Gabriel Gadfly 2009-2012