No. 5 Nebraska

The LJS made legal threats against another board that I read for reposting its online content. Even if you provide a link, apparently there is a maximum number of characters that you can legally quote on your own site. That board doesn't get nearly as much traffic as this board does, so I have always been shocked that HB gets away with this kind of stuff.

 
Enhance89 said:
If it was a problem, obviously the MODS would lock it. Since it's not, I vote we quit derailing this thread purely to fulfill some misplaced sense of entitlement you have.
Click to expand...
Obviously I'm totally and completely in the wrong here. Afterall, if everyone else does it, that makes it right. :facepalm:

 
captain obvious said:
The LJS made legal threats against another board that I read for reposting its online content. Even if you provide a link, apparently there is a maximum number of characters that you can legally quote on your own site. That board doesn't get nearly as much traffic as this board does, so I have always been shocked that HB gets away with this kind of stuff.
Click to expand...
Most boards clamp down on it, for good reason. I'm surprised it gets zero attention here.

 
saunders45 said:
Enhance89 said:
saunders45 said:
TheCheshireCat said:
saunders45 said:
Why not just post a paragraph, and link to the article instead of copying the whole thing?
Click to expand...
Hey thanks for your input saunders45. Next time I'll post a paragraph and link it since you're intimidated by long articles. I'll see if I can find some pictures to go with it too just to make it easy on you.
Click to expand...
I'll ignore the childish insult (hurrrrr durrrr, yurrrr dumbbbb), and spell it out for you. It's not about the article "length" at all. But copy/pasting a whole article removes the need to visit the site, denying them of page hits and ad revenue.
Click to expand...
But from a convenience standpoint, I would personally much rather have the entire article posted than only a paragraph and then a link.
Click to expand...
So..... basically you don't care about the site then? Someone takes the time to research and write an article, and you can't be bothered to contribute to pageview/ad revenue because you can't be bothered to click a link? Isn't that basically stealing?
Click to expand...

How about you actually look into something before you start going off on them. Pre-Snap Read is powered by wordpress, didn't cost him anything other than hosting. It's a blog. It's not someones website, there are no ads on the site that they need to develop hits for. There is nothing that is being paid for, therefore no copyright infringement like there would be on the rivals paid site. In fact, let's say that it WAS a site like that. Even copy/pasting a PARAGRAPH would be illegal, such as you suggested. You can't take someones word for word statements and post them, so your suggestion, in your example, would still be illegal. Now, this is a blog, he is doing this for his own enjoyment. Yes, he is also a writer for the New York Times, BUT it even says on the site that they have no affiliation with the New York Times.

 
saunders45 said:
Enhance89 said:
If it was a problem, obviously the MODS would lock it. Since it's not, I vote we quit derailing this thread purely to fulfill some misplaced sense of entitlement you have.
Click to expand...
Obviously I'm totally and completely in the wrong here. Afterall, if everyone else does it, that makes it right. :facepalm:
Click to expand...
That's not even the point, although I'm glad you decided to take in that direction.

 
huskerswrkhavoc said:
How about you actually look into something before you start going off on them. Pre-Snap Read is powered by wordpress, didn't cost him anything other than hosting. It's a blog. It's not someones website, there are no ads on the site that they need to develop hits for. There is nothing that is being paid for, therefore no copyright infringement like there would be on the rivals paid site. In fact, let's say that it WAS a site like that. Even copy/pasting a PARAGRAPH would be illegal, such as you suggested. You can't take someones word for word statements and post them, so your suggestion, in your example, would still be illegal. Now, this is a blog, he is doing this for his own enjoyment. Yes, he is also a writer for the New York Times, BUT it even says on the site that they have no affiliation with the New York Times.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry to be contributing to the hijacking of this thread, but the above message contains a great deal of misinformation about how copyright law works.

First, just because something is put up on a blog with no ads does not mean that it is exempt from copyright law. Someone publishing a free blog still maintains rights to control the distribution and use of the material posted there. They can choose to say, "Feel free to republish elsewhere" or "You may republish for a fee" or whatever.

Second, the reprinting of a paragraph of a copyrighted work is permissible under the principle of fair use (unless you're not using it for "fair use" purposes, which do include commentary and discussion). This is true even in the case of paid sites like Rivals. If you reprint a paragraph of "subscriber-only" info on Rivals for the purposes of commentary and discussion, you may be violating the terms of your subscription agreement with Rivals, but you're not violating any copyright laws. (The limits on how much of the article you can reprint is a bit more legally complicated). Also, you'd be violating Huskerboard.com rules, which is of course the prerogative of the fine folks running this site.

It is certainly likely that this particular blog writer doesn't care about the material being reprinted in its entirety, but that's his option as controller of the copyright.

Again, sorry to hijack, but I couldn't resist clarifying, especially given the "How about you actually look into something before you start going off on them?" comment. If any intellectual property experts want to correct me, go for it. I've only done a little bit of copyright work, but enough to feel pretty confident of the info above.

 
BeltwayHusker said:
Again, sorry to hijack, but I couldn't resist clarifying, especially given the "How about you actually look into something before you start going off on them?" comment. If any intellectual property experts want to correct me, go for it. I've only done a little bit of copyright work, but enough to feel pretty confident of the info above.
Click to expand...
The thread was already hijacked.

 
So everytime someone posts the article with a link (other than orangebloods) everyone just clicks on the stupid link and closes the window. Problem solved. :ahhhhhhhh

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top