Thank you.
In my opinion, you should gain some understanding of what is posted on Free Republic’s home page.
General Copyright Statement:
Most of the sourced material posted to Free Republic is posted according to the “fair use” doctrine of copyright law for non-commercial news reporting, education and discussion purposes. We used to post full text of most articles so we could document history as it’s being made, but more and more news agencies are now requesting us to post excerpts and links only to their material, and some are requesting that we post no material at all from their sites. We are complying with all such requests. Click here for the latest list of copyright requests. Please send takedown requests to: jimrob@psnw.com
I don't see all that much difference, however, when bloggers are forced to post the full text of their articles instead of excerpting, even in a forum that is ostensible dedicated to blogs. Sure, one can argue that they have a choice to post at all, but their choice is essentially one of not publishing what they have to say at all, or else giving FR free content with no renumeration of any kind whatsoever to the blogger for their time and effort. The fact that most bloggers would not otherwise consent to having the full text of their posts put up on FR is shown in the fact that so many of them, unwittingly or not, excerpt.
By going ahead and posting their full posts, you are essentially stealing from them. That's still immoral, even though FR management has decided to define it as allowable.
The main difference is that large news organisations could make FR's finances extremely problematic if people kept posting their copy in full, while Joe Schmoe blogger typically cannot. Hence, since FR can get away with thieving blogger material, it does so, whereas a policy of excerpting from those who could successfully sue FR is followed.