Please note this is an archived topic, so it is locked and unable to be replied to. You may, however, start a new topic and refer to this topic with a link: http://www.banjohangout.org/archive/406805
Fishcoy - Posted - 01/09/2026: 08:15:36
There is some information on BHO posts that I would like to use in my research. Can I use it as being a public post or quote that information
Ron Deiss
Capybara - Posted - 01/09/2026: 09:20:51
Is this research associated with a university and subject to IRB ethics approval? If so, you must consult them. If it is not, it will depend on your personal research ethics perspective. Either way, the answer is generally 'yes'.
BHO posts are fundamentally and technically public interactions; a BHO account is not required to view forum posts and posts are freely discoverable via SEO/Google, as far as I understand. You might consider reaching out via private message and getting approval or 'member checks' from the specific individuals you are quoting, and/or getting approval from a moderator/Eric. There is a lot of guidance surrounding the ethical use of public social media/internet data. I am an social media researcher (although never regarding BHO) and I can point you to some more specific literature/guidance if you send me an email/private message and give me some time (currently traveling).
Capybara - Posted - 01/09/2026: 09:23:35
If you're not interested in BHO posts as research data, but about banjo-related information in general, then the answer is still 'probably yes.' I personally would use BHO-originated banjo info and quote/cite the source, since that's best practice regardless of the public question. It's effectively the same as talking to experts offline--an expert told you something, and you use than infor while attributing the source.
Fishcoy - Posted - 01/09/2026: 10:22:47
I am referring to an archived post that I do want to reference.
Fishcoy - Posted - 01/09/2026: 10:25:11
I did attempt to contact the originator of the post and recieved no reply.
Ron
Laurence Diehl - Posted - 01/09/2026: 10:48:18
Personally, I think a citation will suffice.
Oh yeah - you can quote me on that!
Edited by - Laurence Diehl on 01/09/2026 10:49:10
Tractor1 - Posted - 01/09/2026: 10:55:03
I think the two biggies in the copywrite/patent radar is giving originators their credit and if the material starts making money--lawful wise --if you have that covered ,who cares--If some one steals your one of a kind lick or magic'' one of a kind'' powerful thought---with no attribution--presenting these ,as their own-they need pimp slapped and given a sentence
Edited by - Tractor1 on 01/09/2026 11:00:33
Alex Z - Posted - 01/09/2026: 15:23:02
"Can I use it as being a public post . . . "
Yes. It is no longer private information that would harm the originator if it became public. It is publicly available information.
" . . . or quote that information"
Yes, with the same conventions and qualifiers as quoting from a book or newspaper.
writerrad - Posted - 01/09/2026: 17:19:40
I used to teach writing MLA papers at a college. I also have been through graduate school where you have to write academic papers and theses. I have written and edited papers or chapters for academically published books. I have been part of editorial committees of scholars who have vetted the sourcing of academically published and non academically published books on questions of banjo history.
Posts here and on similar boards can be referenced by concise and accurate quotations and summaries of what they write here. Posts on these boards are published like anything published in a newspaper, book, or a magazine. You can quote them without the permission of the writer just like you can quote anything published in a newspaper or a magazine, or broadcast on radio or television or YouTube. Once something it is published, it is part of public discussion.
You cannot publish entire articles or pamphlets or papers without the permission of the person who you are quote and usually without the permission of the publication. You cannot have extended quotations of posts someone else writes as opposed to concise quotes and your summary in something that is for sale. I have had that done to me and immediately talked to an attorney about that.
For an academic paper or anywhere where what is the truth matters, you must be concise and summarize accurately what others say. You cannot substitute a quotation for your own writing. You cannot take something someone else has written and "quote" it to the length of an article let alone a book or pamphlet.
On the other hand, once you have post something here, it is like it has been published in a newspaper or magazine. You cannot forbid someone from quoting it.
The big problem is that no qualifications are required to post anything on banjo hangout. (This old fogey actually typed "banjo-l" not Hangout first). People post things here that have absolutely no basis in fact. Speaking especially in an academic setting, but any setting, if I am taking something someone writes here for good coin, I am going to want to know who they are and whether I trust them or if they are qualified to have an opinion about it count in the setting that I am publishing or editing in. I may inquire what their sources are, and see whether they meet the standards of the publication or reserch I am engaged in.
You cannot quote or reference something to substitute for your own writing. You can refer to facts, statements, and opinions, and give enough to provide the gist of someone else's opinions, arguments, or statements, but you cannot quote pages and pages of another person's writing, particularly in any publication that is sold to the public.
The issue for me is more whether the person being referenced is a reliable vetted source for more than opinion. People type things here that have no basis in fact, no basis in real evidence. People post here ideas that have long been refuted by authoritative work on the banjo or other subjects.
However, posting on a public internet forum is publishing to the public and part of open discussion. Writers and researchers are free to quite or refer to that information as it appears here without seeking the permission of the person posting.
Edited by - writerrad on 01/09/2026 17:32:57
Alex Z - Posted - 01/09/2026: 18:11:54
"Posts on these boards are published like anything published in a newspaper, book, or a magazine."
This is correct. And once published, it is "fixed in a tangible medium of expression" and therefore is automatically copyrighted.
"You can quote them without the permission of the writer just like you can quote anything published in a newspaper or a magazine, or broadcast on radio or television or YouTube. Once something it is published, it is part of public discussion. "
This is not completely correct. You have to treat public posts, newspapers, broadcasts that are recorded, etc. as copyrighted material. Quotes without specific permission can be used as part of "fair use" of copyrighted material, where the boundaries of "fair use" have been shaped by court decisions, subject to several criteria. And there are exceptions for such things as educational use and use in religious services, both subject to certain restrictions.
Doesn't mean everyone treats this information as copyrighted material, and doesn't mean that every little copyright infringement is prosecuted. Nevertheless, common practices do not supersede copyright law, and there is no single practice to get around it, such as "as long as I cite the source, it is OK to quote anything I want."
Copyright rules don't always follow casual common sense. 
Edited by - Alex Z on 01/09/2026 18:12:24
Fishcoy - Posted - 01/09/2026: 21:38:07
I just want to do the correct way and in legal manner. So how do I reference? Example?
Alex Z - Posted - 01/10/2026: 07:15:57
The correct and legal manner involves more than just the format of the reference.
Strictly, it involves what's being quoted, how much is being quoted, and how the quote is being used.
For example, if the quote is just some off-the-wall clever phrase, you probably don't need anything. Example would be repeating some banjo joke that's been around for years.
If the quote is from a widely known banjo picker who has played a particular banjo and stated it sounds like a pre-war Gibson Mastertone, and that phrase is put into a sales pitch by a seller, might want actual permission to cite the source's words.
Heck, the BHO allows entire posts to be quoted in another person's post just for the purpose of continuing the conversation or rebutting. Nobody gives a darn.
So, what is the nature of the material you want to quote and what exactly are you using the quote for? And will you be using the quote outside of the BHO, such as something you want to submit to another party or publish?
Alex Z - Posted - 01/10/2026: 07:21:58
To make a relevant distinction, violation of copyright is different from plagiarism.
If the poster is concerned about passing something off as his own, then citation would work.
As the saying goes, plagiarism is an ethical violation and barred in academic work, while violation of copyright is a legal violation but quite common in academic work.
Fishcoy - Posted - 01/10/2026: 07:38:27
I thank everyone for their posts. Opinions Count!
writerrad - Posted - 01/10/2026: 08:13:18
" plagiarism" is actually harder and harder because of the massive online environment. If you have experience with writing, editing, publishing, the language, you can find the source of so many things easily these days. I found this both as a college composition professor and working with submissions to journals and magazines, and with editors on book projects. Even when I taught at a college, which ended 15 years ago, there were databases that you could put a few sentences from a submitted paper and find the source in few minutes. I
f you are used to working with writing as editor or even a proof reader, it is fairly easy to recognize what seems fishy. There are extensive databases of published material through which an editor or writer can search to find out where something comes from. When I taught at the college again 15 years ago, there were private databases English professors had access to that were pretty easy to figure out.
Most people in an editorial position understand the particular way each person or other people write. It is also fairly distinct to anyone who has worked in publishing and editing to tell the difference between a published piece from a journal, newspaper, magazine, book or professional web site that has been written by a professional writer, and then edited by a professional editor, and then perhaps proof read and corrected by proof reader from normal copy that is submitted. You can usually find the source of plagiarism in a few minutes. Increasingly you can do it all with Google, let alone some of the private editorial databases.
Stupid people try stupid things. A year ago at a booth at an OTM weekend, I picked up a pamphlet and starting reading something for sale. It seems familiar. though dated reflecting what banjo roots folks would have said in 2004, not today. I realized that it was something I had written and posted on the original Black Banjo Then and Now Group. I did talk to a lawyer about it.
Originally posted by Alex Z
To make a relevant distinction, violation of copyright is different from plagiarism.
If the poster is concerned about passing something off as his own, then citation would work.
As the saying goes, plagiarism is an ethical violation and barred in academic work, while violation of copyright is a legal violation but quite common in academic work.
writerrad - Posted - 01/10/2026: 08:24:39
The legal difference has to do with what is published copyrighted material and what is not. The legal difference also has to do with referring to what someone said so you can comment about it on one side, and reproducing sizable portions of that material to substitute for your own work, even if that work is simply summarizing .
The legal and moral difference also has to do with claiming something someone else wrote or developed was written by you or some other person who did not write it. Since i tend to see things mostly in regard to scholarship and research, it is very important to pinpoint who first developed an idea or first found a fact, particularly if that person is wrong.
There is also a certain line when you are referring to something someone else wrote in a product that you are offering for sale.
writerrad - Posted - 01/10/2026: 08:35:49
I would also say that there is a particular issue to this in the old time music and banjo community. For whatever reason, there is a very high percentage of people who are involved in old time music, bluegrass music, and particularly the banjo and the fiddle who are technically adept people. It was surprising to me back in the 80s when I took courses in computer programming , the number of professors and instructors I had at colleges who were either bluegrass or old time music enthusiasts or even recognized players and as I came to know people in the banjo and old time music world how many people were significant figures in the computer and Internet communities were also pickers.
Starting with good old Banjo L and Fiddle L "back in the day" a lot of crucial community building and research on both bluegrass and old time music, and especially for me banjo origins and history, has come solely due to the Internet, the listserves that developed early and operations like Banjo Hangout. If I am starting on an academic project, or to give a presentation at a banjo camp, or fiddle hell, have a thorny question I am trying to work out, or just want to know more about a tune or song I am playing, the first place I will go will be to Banjo Hangouut and Fiddle Hangout and other web sites.
There is nothing better. Whatever confusions and problems we need to be thankful to the people who started such things and who keep them going and to the moderators who try to make me and others here behave properly.
As I have become an old fart, nothing impresses me whether in this regard or in my community or family, than the generosity such things or being a moderator or whatever here represents. I want to thank Eric and all the helpers for what they have given to all of our lives.
