It was a cute idea, to make a small book filled with some pithy tweets to make you think and laugh. In practice, it even came out looking good.
The only problem with the project? The tweets inside were largely taken without permission. That is, the ‘author’ of the book Suzanne Schwalb just lifted tweets from other Twitter users, and sold them in book format. You can view the book here [non-affiliate Amazon link].
The original Twitter users are not happy, and have trashed the book in the Amazon.com ratings. It has so far racked up some 28 one star ratings, out of 31 total reviews. In fact, the book only has a single review over two stars. In keeping with its utter sloshing in the ratings game, the book has fallen to nearly the 200,000th sales position.
Legal action is doubtful, as there is probably little money to recoup, but the outcry and situation are comical. The poor author ripped off one of the most vocal groups in the world: active Twitter users. And lo-and-behold, those people knew how to use Amazon. Busted.
And as a final straw, a user has uploaded a photo for the book that is viewable on its page. What is the image? A large fecal pile with a content looking man sitting atop the stack. Fitting, don’t you think?
And finally, for context, an excerpt from the most popular Amazon review of the book:
[Note: This book's unauthorized commercial use of my Twitter posts is the basis for this review]
As others reviewers have mentioned, this book is primarily a compendium of Twitter posts that were written by people who are not the author. I am one of those people.
While I’m thrilled that *anyone* enjoys *any* of the 4,000 items I’ve written and posted for the entertainment of the 67,000 people who are deranged enough to follow me on Twitter, I’m disappointed that the author, editor, and publisher of this title never bothered to seek any kind of permission before publishing and selling my stuff. And, from what I can gather, I’m neither the only person who got nicked, nor the only person who absolutely does not consider it some big-hearted honor.
Ephemeral as this material might seem to anyone who didn’t write it–whether to the publisher who essentially stole it, or to the readers who share my grave distaste for the glut of similar shovelbooks–it’s simply not cricket to compile and sell a _collection of anything_ other people have made without asking permission, negotiating a license, and paying a mutually agreeable fee to the creator. Period.
Uhoh! Did you ask Merlin before republishing his Amazon book review in your editorial? Busted.
I only used an excerpt, and provided full disclosure and a link. I'm fine.
Hmm…well Nick Douglas wrote the book Twitter Wit, but only after he got permission of each and every person in the book. A little bit of effort is useful.
I'd be curious to see if you can even copyright Tweets. It would be silly for all these people to use legalese in their arguments if there's no basis.
Asking the users just because you SHOULD, and it's the “right thing to do” I totally agree with. This “author” totally should have done that. But I have sincere doubts that there was any legally actionable activity on their part.
Under U.S. copyright law, the second you type your tweet, you own the rights to it. Twitter’s terms of service specifically reconfirms these rights – “You retain your rights to any Content you submit, post or display on or through the Services.” – and then has you grant Twitter license to distribute your content (which is, after all, the service).
The book’s author and publisher are clearly in the wrong, but, as Alex suggests, it’s probably not financially prudent for the real authors of the Tweets to pursue legal action.
No, it isn’t. Under US law, copyright is granted on publication to “original works of authorship” finalized in “fixed forms of expression” but this does not extend to names, titles, or short phrases. http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ34.pdf
Funny thing is, if the author had gone through the trouble of asking permission, a good number of the tweeters likely would have consented and been excited at being included even without pay. Think if all those tweeters had been recommending the book rather than trashing it, all because of a little thing called permission.
It is amazing what a little common courtesy can do for you.
A linked quote is fair use. Copying someone else's work to make money off of it, without their permission, is not.
Is there a list somewhere showing who all had Tweets lifted by this so-called 'author'?
twitter is public domain. Its like posting something on a public forum and crying that someone “stole” it. If you want to keep what you say copyrighted, then post it on your own website. If you don’t want your ideas stolen, then don’t twitter it. Write it down in a word document and keep on ur computer… stupid