jj - Ever notice how a lot of Brit political and judicial stories start with the statement "... it can now be revealed ..."? They exist at the sufferance of the Crown, and as a result, require clearance prior to publishing. Here the Press gets up in arms should any entity invade it's self-appointed turf to report what and when it deems newsworthy; do a search for "prior restraint". Note how up-in-arms the press gets when the Military restricts their access to front-line actions or their huffy reactions to press pooling.
If FR was allowing wholesale copies of Dame Cartland's or Dick Francis' works, then indeed those would be violations of copyright. Straight news cannot be copyrighted, as the Constitution's First Amendment gives the People the right to discover, disseminate, and discuss the information thereof. If Media Outlets made money on News, you'd have information overload, instead of the dearth of valid info that is the norm.
At the top and bottom of every thread page in Free Republic is this notation:
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
"Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, ..." AMENDS the Copyright Clause contained in Article I Section 8, as recognition that restricting Political Speech is a forerunner to tyranny.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, I do not play one in the Pictures, nor am I a member of Jim Robinson's Staff; but the info I've posted above is all gleaned from this site -- for which I am eternally grateful.
Thank you, Jim.
Cheers.