ender8282 at yahoo.com
Wed Apr 30 19:30:27 UTC 2008
David McGlone wrote:
> How am I'm telling people to break the law?
> No_law_is_broken_if_you_cite_your_source!! Simple as that.
If I were to copy an entire book and give it to you even if I told you
who the author was that would still be copyright infringement. The law
is trying to protect the 'artists' ability to profit from their work. If
you redistribute the work for free they cannot profit from it. The AP is
paid for their articles. The site you took the article from hosts adds
and that is how the site makes its money. If you send the article
(without the adds) they cannot make money.
> What I said above made perfect sense. I think our misunderstanding is where
> you think I am stating that copying "whole" works is not illegal. I wouldn't
> know about that, but I do know that taking excerpts or even paragraphs from
> an author and citing your source is_perfectly_legal. there are no and, if or
> buts about it.
Your excerpts from the article made it 'feel' like a complete article.
Until I went back and compared the post to the article I thought that it
had been the ENTIRE article. Until just a second ago I thought you were
defending reproducing the entire article.
How much of an article can be copied is debatable. I would be curious to
hear someone weigh in on this. Based on SlashDot it appears to be either
legal or not worth most peoples time to go after reproductions of excerpts.
To be or not to be, that is the question
2b || !2b
(0b10)*(0b1100010) || !(0b10)*(0b1100010)
0b11000100 || !0b11000100
0b11000100 || 0b00111011
255, that is the answer.
More information about the kubuntu-users