What about cutting a post from another forum and pasting it on a different one. No articles just peoples opinions, for discussion?

<font color=skyblue>Okay, thanks. I'll accept that explanation Memnoch and TL.

Man...when you don't want me to shoot anybody...don't give me the ammunition for my gun! [img]smile.gif[/img]

I'm trigger-happy enough as it is. [img]graemlins/2gunfire.gif[/img]

</font>

[ 03-16-2005, 08:24 AM: Message edited by: Larry_OHF ]

The short answer is Stay Off the Hustler forums -- you'll go blind!!

I love it when judges award penny damages for spurious claims and then don't give costs.

<font color = lightgreen>This is why I normally post only a link to a particular website or news article rather than trying to quote from it directly. Besides, I have always considered the internet to be akin to a library, from a citation point of view--you may cite articles, books, newspapers, etc. in a scholarly paper without (except in rare cases) having to obtain a license or prior written permission of the author/publisher to do so.

I suspect the worst wrinkles are going to be in those cases where an article from a pay-per-subscription website winds up being posted on a free forum, but even then news programs make such citationa all the time. [img]graemlins/1ponder.gif[/img] </font>

However one could also easily make the argument that they are also being used to help the website owner solicit money from the Ironworks visitors. I'm sure we've all seem the "Donation Goal for this Month" thing at the top of the screen. A lawyer would have little trouble turning that into an argument that Ziroc was gaining financially from the reproduction of copyrighted work.

I'd say Seraph makes a solid point there.

<font color=plum>Hmmmmmm....interesting points on both sides so far. I usually try to copy the entire article (including the author's name) so that I ensure I give PROPER credit to the source. Maybe that was the wrong approach. Maybe it's best to just provide a link and let those interested go view the article for themselves.

I just know from my own experience that I'm more likely to read the article if it's posted here instead of forcing me to open a new window to look at it. But that's just a personal pet peeve.</font>

Cerek, it's probably the reason that everyone copies and pastes - to make sure people actually READ the article. :D

<font color=plum>Heya <font color=violet>Violet</font>.

I appreciate your posting the rest of the author's page without editing, but to be honost, I didn't see that <font color=tan>Timber's</font> quote was taken out of context. The guy says there is to be absolutely NO copying of his page to another internet site for ANY reason - EVEN educational purposes - and that is the same thing <font color=tan>TL</font> was pointing out.

But since he did specify there was to be no copying of his article, wouldn't that actually make your own post (intended solely for clarification) a violation of his copyright rules?

I don't agree with the guy and I personally see NOTHING wrong with the post you made, but it did occur to me that it technically violates the author's rules. The one thing I DID get from reading the complete page is that this guy is also completely full of himself. The constant reminders that HE must be given FULL credit for the info on that page (as if no other lawyer could or would post similar material) and that - if anybody dared violate his rule and post the info somewhere else - he would find it eventually. How? Does this guy spend each evening browsing thousands of sites looking for a possible breach of his rules???

Ah well. No criticism towards you, darlin. You were acting in good faith, and I don't see anything wrong with what you did. Just didn't see that <font color=tan>Timber</font> had taken anything out of context either. [img]graemlins/dunno.gif[/img] </font>