The thread is closed leaving everything in question. Here's an example of the issue, but isn't this guy ultimately responsible for what goes on here? Eager to do the right thing, I always try to emulate Denny Crane. http://sportstwo.com/threads/214308...harms-of-false-economics-Messiah-Paul-Krugman
If Denny wants to put his site in danger, then that's his prerogative. I don't think that it's responsible for us Blazers mods to allow our board to put it in danger. Ed O.
And not sure US copyright laws prohibit articles being posted to discuss A federal judge ruled Monday that publishing an entire article without the rights holder’s authorization was a fair use of the work, in yet another blow to newspaper copyright
I think so, but you be the judge http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/06/fair-use-defense/ A relevant paragraph in case don't feel like reading it: It’s not often that republishing an entire work without permission is deemed fair use. Fair use is an infringement defense when the defendant reproduced a copyrighted work for purposes such as criticism, commentary, teaching and research. The defense is analyzed on a case-by-case basis.
It's not just legality. I just think it's uncool to steal people's work. It's bad enough that the newspaper industry is giving away their product for free and will eventually take a death, but now people aren't even reading the articles on the newspaper website. These companies rely on advertising.
I totally respect that. But when it comes to closing threads because of it, then hopefully it is a mod policy because of legal risk and not because it's uncool. If it's uncool is the standard to have threads closed, well . . . . . ..
Ed closed that one because of his legal opinion. We trust his legal opinion. I haven't closed any threads because I think it's uncool.
Good to know and what I thought. Besides the whole papag thing (which made for good drama, for a while), you are doing a good job being a mod while kind of taking some flack for it. Hope you stick with it and thanks for doing it.
The other thread said we should quote no more than 1/4 of the article. I have a sincere question that kept me up last night. What if the article is only about 12 words long? Like a Rotoworld link. Often it will say something like, "LaMarcus Aldridge (bug bite) will miss tonight's game." 1/4 of those 8 words is 2 words. Here are some ways I could quote the article: LaMarcus...miss Aldridge (bug miss...game I need some guidance here because I believe everyone should strictly adhere to the law of the land.
I suggest an alternative be allowed. The quoter may choose between the 1/4 rule, or the acronym shorthand rule, to wit: LABBWMTG A third method of summary would be to draw a picture to summarize the article. Denny could maintain a staff artist who would paint his impressions, which would replace the quote in the post. To save money, I recommend that Denny draw the pictures.
Apparently his "legal opinion" isn't worth much, considering the case that I originally posted, and now Denny and ToB have cited as well. But, I bet it felt amazing to be an expert for a few minutes.
