On Feb 1, 2005, at 3:59 AM, boblq wrote:
On Tuesday 01 February 2005 12:41 am, Neil Schneider wrote:Please don't post complete articles to the lists. This is a copyright violation and could cause all of us grief. Excerpts are ok, at least under my understanding of "fair use", with a URL for anyone interested in reading the full article. KPLUG can't afford to be sued for copyright violation, and unless you're incredibly rich, you probably can't either.
Just as a practical question. When was the last time such a suit happened? Please cite an example.
http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualproperty/distance.htm
"You are on Firm Ground When Your Use Involves:
* Comment, criticism, news reporting, parody (Campbell v. Acuff-Rose)
o Still, you must take all 4 factors into consideration: Los Angeles
Times v. Free Republic (posting of full text of articles on website,
even for "criticism and comment" is not a fair use)"
PS. I have an alternative defense. I am incredibly poor ;)
Easy solution--toss you in jail.
However, I argue for links from a much different angle. First, the people
providing the article really deserve to have you look at their website. If
they took the time to compile it, I can stare at the various banners/ads/etc.
buried in the article as long as they don't get aggressive (ie. opening crap
on my computer, starting flash or requiring registration).
Second, often the articles I get provide extra diagrams, links, context, etc.
that will not come through in my mail. The link is a better idea.
Third, I like to have the original link because it gives me the ability to
judge the veracity, authority, and bias of the source site.
-a
--
KPLUG-List mailing list [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
