It’s really silly.
When I look at a posted article, I often go back to the original, and sometimes take a look around the site, reading other articles.
If anything, IMHO reading reposted articles INCREASES the eyeballs on the site. I certainly don’t read, say, Der Spiegal, unless a freeper posts an article from it.
The distinction between fair use and not, should have been this simple.
F.R. Is a donor funded website, and has no advertising.
If the website (FR) does not benefit from the hit count (paid by advertisers), then FR is not stealing the hits or the money from another website.
In fact, it does quite the opposite. There are TONS of websites I would never have visited, had someone not mentioned or linked it or sourced it.
As far as being ‘required’ to excerpt, I don’t really want the WHOLE article, especially if long, at the top of the thread. Being able to open the ‘source’ in another window to read and refer to while I’m posting is quite helpful.
I don’t mind hitting the source page and letting them get a ‘hit’ from me so an advertiser pays them. The advertisements are what provide much of the revenue on the net.
The MSM’s that sued or restrict their articles from being even sourced are not made because F.R. is ‘stealing’ revenue from them. They know it’s not true. What they are mad about is what we SAY about their articles.
For example, it withholds articles from sources it pays to print, like AP wire stories. Not even a headline from the print newspaper with a link. AP has its own internet posting requirements.
yitbos
Agreed. The MSM old-media types have no concept of what a content portal is. They still somehow believe people will come to their bland, one-size-fits-all website which besides the articles and some video only offers advertising. There is no common or shared interest other than a political bent. Internet patrons gravitate to appealing content, not a name.
Exactly.
The fact that the Onion, for instance, went all out to prevent articles from being linked or excerpted on Free Republic never made sense to me. I normally don’t go to the Onion; when I am “surfing” the internet, there are only a couple of sites I frequent, and unless something is referenced, I’m not going to go to it. Mostly, I forget that the Onion even exists. But if someone excerpts an article or links a video from the Onion, I may end up spending quite a bit of time on that site.
Same here. I never go to CNN or ABC.com unless posted here because sometimes I want to see comments. The CBC is left leaning, however after Harper's (Conservative PM) victory in Ottawa I went to the NY times via here and saw many conservative viewpoints in the comments section, something I wouldn't have seen had it not been posted here in entirety.