[xzins]

Do you think it would be easier to defend if FR were profiting from it?

[Wissa]

Do you think it would be easier to defend if FR were profiting from it?

I'm not a lawyer either, so I have no idea. It just seems though that if we're still open to lawsuits, and are limited to links-only from a number of sites, that the current approach of FreeRepublic of Fair Use and not-for-profit status seems like we're relying on some defense that doesn't really exist.

I think the argument for gaining a defense by being not-for-profit had more legitimacy back when we were posting full articles, and not just excerpts. Right now I'm just plain confused over whether we actually gain any benefit from refusing to accept advertising.

[whattajoke]

Do you think it would be easier to defend if FR were profiting from it?

Aren't they? $350,000+ per year to run an antiquated discussion board? There is a (very small) paid staff, isn't there? I always thought the Robinsons made a few bucks off FR, and it never crossed my mind that others though otherwise.