[paudio]

Gawker defended its action in a post Thursday titled "Sarah Palin is Mad at Us for Leaking Pages From Her Book" and addressed a message to "Sarah" telling her to read pages about fair use under copyright law. "Or skip the totally boring reading and call one of your lawyers," the post said. "They'll walk you through it."

So, did the judges walk their lawyers through it? Or they actually need to find new lawyers?

[sbMKE]

If filesharing a song or two is worth a million or so in fines, then this should be a good ten or twenty worth of theft.

[Al B.]

So, did the judges walk their lawyers through it? Or they actually need to find new lawyers?

If they'd read "Sarah's" tweet yesterday saying "Isn't that illegal?", they might have gotten a clue as to what was coming. After the suit was filed, one of Palin's inner circle, Rebecca Mansour, tweeted:

"Dear Gawker,when she asks a rhetorical question,it's cuz we're about to deliver the answer.Have fun w HarprCollns' lawyrs http://is.gd/hstI6"

[relictele]

Someone inform those wankers that until the book is officially published there isn’t any !@#!#$@# fair use.

Until it’s officially published their actions are THEFT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY and possibly computer hacking crimes.

Beyond that, fair use is a paragraph or two at most, not entire pages.