copyright fair-use
I plan on making an intentionally fake news site - can I *copy* headlines from other sources?
<p>First off: this is an experiment with AI - the content I create will state that it is fake and generated news - I'm not trying to mislead anyone!</p>
<p>So for my 'fake news' site I plan on copying headlines from news sites all over the web (using RSS feeds if that matters). <strong>Is this considered <em>fair use</em>?</strong> I have no issue with attributing where I get each headline (eg. A line below the headline saying something like 'source:www.bbc.co.uk'). I <em>could</em> generate the headlines myself, but I feel using real headlines adds an air of realism to the project.</p>
<p>If it matters, I don't expect to make any money from this, although there may be potential to make add revenue if it's a big success!</p>

<p>To examine this further and answer your question, we need to look at Copyright (and fair use) as well as Defamation.</p>
<p>Alas, I am unsure as to how taking legitimate headlines from around the world and attributing their source is 'fake news' - but I'll accept that it's 'fake news' for the purposes of exploring this topic.</p>
<p>A lot of the potential (or motive) for a person or company to litigate against you will be context specific and detailed to how you have used their work and portray their journalists and characters - misquotes etc.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>As an exception to British copyright law, fair dealing is governed by
Sections 29 and 30 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988,
which outlines three instance where fair dealing is a legitimate
defence:</p>
<ol>
<li>If the use is for the purposes of research or private study;</li>
<li>If it is used for the purposes of criticism, review or quotation;</li>
<li>Where it is utilised for the purposes of reporting current events (this does
not apply to photographs)</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
<p>However, where you may come into problems is:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A statutory definition for fair dealing does not exist; it will always
be a matter of fact, degree and interpretation in every fair use case.
Nor is there a percentage or quantitative measure to determine fair
dealing. The Intellectual Property Office lists the key factors used
to determine the validity of whether a particular dealing with a work
is fair as follows:</p>
<ul>
<li>Has the use of the work impacted negatively on the market for the original work? If the creator or owner has lost potential revenue through the re-use of their work, it is not likely to be fair.</li>
<li>Was it reasonable and necessary to use the amount of work that was    taken?</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<p>Also:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Fair use for parody, caricature or pastiche The UK copyright law on
fair use of works for the purposes of creating a parody or pastiche is
also listed in Section 30A, Schedule 2 (2A) of the Copyright, Designs
and Patents Act 1988.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>References to all <a href="https://www.bl.uk/business-and-ip-centre/articles/fair-use-copyright-explained" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Guidance from the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) states that fair
use needs to be “fair and proportionate” and does not protect an
individual from any <strong>other rights</strong> an author may have.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Those <strong>other rights</strong> may involve claiming <strong>defamation</strong> if this material creates fake news and uses the names of real journalists or companies etc - and if they allege that your AI fake news has caused serious harm in any way to their reputation - they could sue you for breach of the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/26" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Defamation Act 2013</a>. All of this is entirely contextual however as to how your AI might display or make fake news and how Google caches it and displays it - and if it could be portrayed as 'real' or believable for example.</p>
<p>You are also doing this at a time where 'anti fake news' law is evolving... and even though you say it's fake news for AI experiment purposes - it's a growing field of concern for many. (see <a href="https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/fake-news-laws-may-catch-during-coronavirus" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>)</p>
<p>Copyright law is a vast and evolving area - and nothing is clear cut. It really depends if a major news company didn't like what you were doing and took exception to it and issued challenges on many areas of law based on that.</p>
