Updated FR Excerpt and Link Only or Deny Posting List due to Copyright Complaints

Note: Don't post anything at all from the Las Vegas Review Journal or anything from organizations run by Stevens Media, LLC or RightHaven, LLC until the lawsuit brought against us by them is resolved.

Here's an updated alphabetical list of the sites that have complained about copyright violations thus far. The posting program will only allow excerpts and or deny posting where designated from the following sites:

These sites must be excerpted and linked only [300 words or less, 1/2 the words or less for short articles]:

These publishers have asked us not to allow any material at all to be posted to FR:

Received another letter from Gannett Publications, publisher of USAToday, and several other newspapers. Due to contractual arrangements they have with third-party content providers, they have denied our request to allow posting of excerpts. They will only allow the posting of titles and links.

Please do not post full text or even excerpts from the following Gannett Web sites:

All material from the Associated Press must be excerpted regardless of source (very brief excerpts). AP photos are not allowed.

Photographs, pictures, images, graphs etc may not be posted if the websites are on the lists or added in any of the posts below.

Ok, thanks for explaining. But, I still have a little question, ok? I just sent this link to someone. Is this kind of a link ok to post as a full quotation? Or a link only?

Just trying to be compliant.

That's pretty much my main question.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040709/film_nm/film_fahrenheit_dc_5

Or do we have to excerpt this kind also? Sorry, just still don't get it.

Thanks for answerering.

The Washington Times must now be excerpted and linked per their copyright concerns.

I'm surprised the WT has gotten on this bandwagon.

Well FWIW excerpting saves bandwidth....

foreverfree

At least we can't do it without getting into another long drawn out legal battle and I do not have the resources or financial wherewithal to fight that battle at this time, so decline to do so.

No....but somebody needs too.

Any Right Wing Sugar Daddy reading this....?
Make a diffence and defend Fair-Use rights!

Well, to win that battle we're gonna have to line up a couple two or three million bucks worth of top notch legal talent and enlist some of the best columnists and editorial writers on the planet to drum up popular support. And we're gonna need a few million grassroots supporters to force the congress to turn it around. There's a half century or more worth of legislative and judicial mischief and meddling to overturn as well as rescinding some international treaties that gave away our sovereignty and many of our individual rights, including free speech. Fair use was just a band-aid. Or should I say, fig leaf?

Heck, i'm not sure.

Except I AM pretty sure AP and Rueters are up for it.

If not,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,?

AP and Rueters are the main sources --- where ALL news finds out what's up.

My thinking is...

FAIR GAME!

How about someone making a list of the email addresses of ALL the editors?

And then, a list of ALL the advertisers?

I'd love to be able to just "click" and send them ALL a piece of my mind.

This would put a siege mentality on any research. My daughter's term paper, a journalism student's use of news copy to study the principles of editing, a teacher putting news clips on a bulletin board--all require the use of copywrit matierial. The phony efforts of the left and their co-conspirators the press to silence our independent pursuit of the truth is getting me really fired up. The ultimate battle is how people use the Internet for the transfer of information. The press must see the writing on the wall--this is their way they are trying to fight their demise as they relegate themselves to the ash heap of history.

What would happen if a website had an article that had embedded in it excerpts from copy-writ material that was purposely put there to trigger a lawsuit? I can see this as a method to catch posters who innocently want to use information that should be freely available on the internet. Could this be paving the way for internet booby traps?

Who else is going to be hit with copy write infringement. Would they come after my son who thought it might be easier to throw in a paragraph on his term paper that was word for word from a internet site? How many of us have done that? Would they start writing laws that required teachers to turn in students they found had used copy writ material? Oh my! This could get really messy in this corner of the woods where we used to have freedom of speech. Instead, the trial lawyers will have their claws in the internet as their new cash cow to gore until it has been destroyed.

I have said before, the press acts as if they are dogs in a chicken coop rather than the watchdogs for freedom they are supposed to be in this free republic.

We can certainly use our free exercise of speech to criticize their tactics. I think the light should shine on the press and I concur with the tactic you describe. The press needs to rise to new standards of reporting the truth. They have been allowed to stagnate with biased reporting and are growing too much moss. Like they say (if I can quote this without copy write infringement), "A rolling stone gathers no moss." The press needs to get up off their duff and start moving with the business of a free press. Right now they are acting like pit bull dogs with a biting problem rather than watch dogs for freedom.

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.