Johann Hari has surprised some of his response to allegations about the lifting material in his interviews

An approval by the Independent 's columnist Johann Hari and the interviewer, that he lifted material for his interviews can be too honest, but it also shows the problem of exactly what is protected by copyright in the news industry. Some of Hari 's letter was found by analyzing blogger Brian Whelan, who had some quotes from the interviews that appeared in earlier articles elsewhere. What has surprised some, Hari 's answer and explains his action in his blog.

He said:

"When I've interviewed a writer, it's quite common that they will express an idea or sentiment to me that they have expressed before in their writing – and, almost always, they've said it more clearly in writing than in speech. So occasionally, at the point in the interview where the subject has expressed an idea, I've quoted the idea as they expressed it in writing, rather than how they expressed it in speech."

If the quotes used by the interviewees themselves were written in articles or books, then their copyright is in question.

It is a defense of fair dealing in copyright material, used for the purposes of reporting, but such a need, of good length and attributed to the original author. So the question is whether to make something like a quote written earlier one that you see is the correct attribution. But at least it is clear who it said.

Where there is a little less easy when, as Whelan any material from the interviews was to propose any other publications written and made by other journalists.

The copyright for news is difficult. There is no copyright in news itself: you can not say, you have to tell the right thing for your readers, viewers or listeners about the facts of an event. All you can copyright the words that allow you to convey the facts of the event. So as long as your opponent will write the story, there is nothing to stop them lifting your copy and provides it to the reader as if it their own.

But when interviewing someone, a journalist and skill work in the recording uses citations accurately and choose the most suitable for publication. Thus, the citations in an interview are protected by copyright. If another from one publication to be used, then the fair use defense would be used and the owner of copyright, possibly a competitor would have to be credited.

This is why many competing publications, rather then a credit to the original paper, which is the survey conducted paraphrase the quotes and put them in indirect speech, whereby the issue of copyright.

Whelan says that the quote is "with a number of other ideas sewn [Israeli journalist Gideon] Levy may or may not be shared with Hari \ have", in which case it may have also been rewritten to avoid problems.

Journalists from the regions certainly cast a wry eye on this debate and the Twitterspat which has the result. Finally, they are tired, her work literally lifted from agencies and citizens never used with a copyright action in the eyes. Whether presenting an ethically correct something said earlier in another article, as if it were told you how the interviewer now is a different debate.

David Banks is co-author of McNae 's Essential Law for Journalists, is a media law consultant