From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Dec 17 15:14:46 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lists.blarg.net (lists.blarg.net [206.124.128.17]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CE0B37B41D for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:14:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from thig.blarg.net (thig.blarg.net [206.124.128.18]) by lists.blarg.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D094EC015; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:14:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([206.124.139.115]) by thig.blarg.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA29345; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:14:11 -0800 Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.3) id fBHNF2s29835; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:15:02 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from swear@blarg.net) To: Jamie Bowden Cc: "Jeremy C. Reed" , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Boston Globe Article (fwd) References: From: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: 17 Dec 2001 15:15:01 -0800 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Lines: 38 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Jamie Bowden writes: > Case law with respect to fair use is very specific that a single artice > in full from a magazine or newspaper is fair use. I just watched this > flamewar a month ago on a list with people who are lawyers in real life. > Copyright law is complicated and ugly, but they all agreed on this point. From the http://www.freerepublic.com : Free Republic has been enjoined from allowing users to post full text articles from the Los Angeles Times (LAT) and Washington Post (WP). The site claims to be non-commercial and makes no profit but can't get non-profit status because of the accompanying political activity restrictions. (One wonders how there can be so many socialist-lite non-profit orgs.) In any case, the fact that they are legaly a for-profit corporation had only a small part in the decision. From the Judgement ("Case Summary"): OUTCOME: Defendants failed to demonstrate that it was necessary to copy, verbatim, plaintiffs' articles to enable website users to criticize the manner in which the media covered current events. Verbatim posting of plaintiffs' articles was more than was necessary to further defendants' critical purpose. Also: The mere fact that a use is commercial does not "give rise to a presumption of unfairness." Lots of other stuff about impact ($, etc) to copyright owners, etc. A great page to waste time on (which I won't post in full, even though I suppose it is in the public domain): http://www.freerepublic.com/judgment.htm To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message