Thanks, I’m not a lawyer but I know that as soon as even the slightest mention of money is involved it can cause quite a stir with copyrighted works verses Fair Use.
Personally I do think the decision as it stands is a plus for us here to use as a precedence for the likes of AP and Gannett.
I would be standing on the sidelines and watching the debate from the balcony section of course, my wife gets mad if I stay at the Holiday Inn too often anymore...
Money complicates the issue but it is not definitive. If someone created a site that did nothing but post excerpts with no links to copyrighted works, no discussion and made money off it, it is a debatable fair use.
As long as Jim keeps excerpting (within reason), linking and sports the reader acessed bulletin board, he is in good shape.
I think his decision about the AP was more out of emotion than reality. The AP can puff all they want but the courts decide fair use. The downside is the AP could use FR as it’s test case and Jim doesn’t have the money nor probably wants to fight another lawsuit, even if the chances of winning were pretty good.
But I doubt the AP would do that, there are bigger fish and more important targets than FR>