This is the question asked most often in newsrooms: "How many words can we take?" Let us give the answer at the outset, because none of the figures circulating on this subject has any statutory basis. The Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works No. 5846 ("FSEK") contains no numerical limit whatsoever for quotation. Not a word count, not a character count, not a percentage, not a number of paragraphs. The tests the statute imposes are entirely qualitative. In this article I explain what those qualitative tests are and how to apply them at the desk.
First let us clear away the error: there is no number in the statute
Phrases such as "don't go over 200 words", "the 20 per cent rule" or "three paragraphs are free" circulate in the industry. None of these phrases appears in the text of FSEK. The articles of the statute dealing with quotation — Articles 34, 35, 36 and 37 — give no figure anywhere.
The four qualitative tests the statute actually imposes
Instead of giving a figure, the statute uses four distinct tests. They appear in different articles and apply to different types of use; which one applies depends on what it is that you have taken.
| Test (the statute's own wording) | Basis | Where it operates |
|---|---|---|
| "within a proportion justified by the purpose" | FSEK Article 35(3) and Article 34(1) | Including a visual or a work in a scientific work; selected and collected works for educational purposes |
| "in abridged form, as press summaries" | FSEK Article 36(2), second sentence | Taking opinion columns and articles whose right of quotation has been reserved |
| "not exceeding the scope of information" | FSEK Article 37 | Taking sound or image fragments from works in connection with current events |
| "may not be used in a manner conflicting with normal exploitation of the work" / "in a way that harms the legitimate interests of the rightholder" | FSEK Article 37, and also Article 34(1) and Article 38(1) | Functions as an upper limit in all three exemptions |
The fourth row matters particularly, because it is a safety valve sitting on top of the other three: even if a use appears acceptable under the first three tests, the freedom falls away if it conflicts with normal exploitation of the work.
Test 1 — "A proportion justified by the purpose"
The wording of FSEK Article 35(3) is as follows:
FSEK Article 35 — third subparagraph
"The inclusion in a scientific work, within a proportion justified by the
purpose and for the purpose of elucidating its contents, of works of fine
art that have been made public and of other published works;"
(Unofficial translation; the Turkish text is authoritative.)What is measured here is not quantity but purpose. "Proportion" is not an absolute length but a ratio measured against the purpose. In practice it asks this question: is a quotation of this length genuinely necessary for the point you are trying to make? If it is not, the proportion has not been justified. The final paragraph of Article 35 also requires in every case that "the quotation be made in a manner that is apparent" and, in scientific works, that the place from which the passage was taken be stated.
Test 2 — "In abridged form, as press summaries"
This is the wording that comes closest to addressing length, and it too contains no figure. The second sentence of FSEK Article 36(2) reads:
FSEK Article 36 — second paragraph, second sentence
"Even where the right of quotation has been reserved, it is permissible to
take the said articles and columns in abridged form, as press summaries,
and to disseminate them by radio or by any other means."
(Unofficial translation.)Two words are decisive. "In abridged form": the text taken must be shorter than the original; where there is no abridgement, there is no "summary" either. "As press summaries": the resulting product must take the form of a summary — that is, a reader who has read the summary should not be treated as having read the original piece, but should have learned what it said. Pasting the paragraphs of an opinion column one after another and putting the word "summary" at the top does not meet this definition.
You will find what result this paragraph produces in each situation, how the phrase "the right of quotation is reserved" is inserted, and a comparison of the two possibilities set out in a table in our article devoted to quoting opinion columns.
Test 3 — "Not exceeding the scope of information" and the normal exploitation test
The measure for the use of sound and image is in Article 37. The article was amended in 2001 by Law No. 4630 and its heading changed from "Interview" to "News":
FSEK Article 37 (Amended: 21/2/2001 - Law No. 4630, Article 19)
"Provided that it is in the nature of news and does not exceed the scope of
information, certain fragments of intellectual and artistic works may, in
connection with current events, be taken onto devices serving the
transmission of signs, sound and/or images. The reproduction, distribution,
performance or broadcasting by means such as radio and television of
fragments so taken is free. This freedom may not be exercised in a way that
harms the legitimate interests of the rightholder or in a manner conflicting
with normal exploitation of the work."
(Unofficial translation.)The article requires three conditions to be met together, and all three are qualitative:
- The nature of news: the use must serve a news item; it must not be a content product in its own right
- Not exceeding the scope of information: the fragment taken is limited to what is needed for the reader or viewer to understand the event
- Not conflicting with normal exploitation: the fragment taken must not exhaust the commercial value of the original work
In practice the third condition is the sharpest. A thirty-second passage taken from a concert may become "contrary to normal exploitation" even though it is short, if it is the best-known part of the piece and the viewer no longer feels any need to listen to the original. The statute measures not duration but effect. We deal separately with how the same test applies to video use in our article on using short video clips.
So what do we do at the desk? Practical decision criteria
Since the statute gives no figure, your internal editorial policy should not rest on a figure either, but on a checklist. Ask the following five questions for every quotation; if you cannot answer "yes" to all of them, shorten the quotation or rewrite it in your own words.
QUOTATION LENGTH CHECKLIST
1. NECESSITY
Am I unable to make the point I want to make without taking these
sentences?
(If I can make it, the quotation is unnecessary -> there is no
"proportion justified by the purpose")
2. WEIGHT
Is the quotation the main body of my piece, or its support?
(If it is the main body, the limit has been exceeded)
3. SUBSTITUTION
After reading my text, will the reader still need to go to the
original?
(If not, there is a risk of breaching the "conflicting with normal
exploitation of the work" test)
4. ORIGINAL CORE
Is what I have taken a fact, or an expression bearing the author's
individual characteristics?
(If it is a fact I am in the field of Article 36(1); if it is
expression I must check the Article 36(2) regime)
5. SOURCE
Have I written out in full the elements enumerated in Article 36(3)?
(name of newspaper/periodical/agency + original source if any +
date and issue number + author's name)If there is no quantitative limit, what does set the limit?
Three things together set the limit: the type of the content, the purpose of the use, and the effect on the original work. The table below shows which test of which article the typical situations encountered in the field are tied to.
| What you have taken | Provision applied | The measure |
|---|---|---|
| The information that an event has occurred | FSEK Article 36(1) | No quantitative limit; the fact may be freely quoted, crediting is mandatory |
| A few sentences from a news text | FSEK Article 36(1) + Article 36(3) | As much as is necessary, without going beyond the character of news |
| An opinion column whose right of quotation has not been reserved | FSEK Article 36(2), first sentence | May be taken as it stands or in adapted form; crediting is mandatory |
| An opinion column whose right of quotation has been reserved | FSEK Article 36(2), second sentence | Only an abridged press summary |
| A fragment of a song, a film or a book | FSEK Article 37 | Nature of news + scope of information + normal exploitation test |
| None of the above | FSEK Articles 20-25 | No exemption; written permission complying with Article 52 is required |
What happens if the limit is exceeded?
A quotation that exceeds the measure no longer falls within the exemption; it becomes an unauthorised use. The consequences are regulated separately in FSEK: Article 66 provides for an action for the cessation of the infringement (fault on the part of the infringer is not required, and where the act was committed by an employee the proprietor of the business may also be sued), Article 68(1) for up to three times the fee that could have been demanded had a contract been concluded, or three times the current market value, Article 70 for damages where there is fault, and Article 71(1)(1) for imprisonment from one to five years or a judicial fine for unauthorised communication to the public and publication.
You can find how these heads of claim are calculated in our article on calculating damages for copyright infringement, and the separate sanction for failing to credit the source in our article on the penalty for republication.
Three concrete rules for the newsroom
- Write a test, not a number. Instead of "a maximum of 150 words", put a rule such as "a quotation may not be the main body of the story, only its support" into your editorial policy. The first has no statutory basis; the second fits the logic of Articles 35 and 37.
- Make the quotation visible. The final paragraph of Article 35 says "the quotation must be made in a manner that is apparent". Quotation marks or block-quote formatting are a legal requirement, not a typographic preference.
- Put the source line next to the quotation. Article 36(3) looks for the source not at the end of the piece but at the place where the quotation is apparent. We give ready-made wording for how to build that line in our article with source-crediting templates.
Rather than leaving the decision on quotation length to the editor's judgement every time, it is safer to design the block-quote component so that the source fields are mandatory. On the news publishing software side, an editor that will not let a quotation block be saved without a source credit runs the five-question list in this article automatically.