Skip to comments.
It's Official: LAT/WP vs Free Republic Settles
LAT/WP vs Free Republic ^
| June 19, 2002
| Jim Robinson
Posted on 06/19/2002 1:54:11 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 361-380, 381-400, 401-420 ... 661-663 next last
To: pyx
Oops. That's not what I meant. The court did not rule in favor of our interpretation. The court ruled that we were not entitled to use the fair use defense. They claimed we are a commercial for profit site. We are not.
Jim
To: Jim Robinson
Woohoo!! Congratulations Jim!! May Free Republic live on FOREVER!! WOOHOO! FREEPERS!!
To: NittanyLion
383
posted on
06/19/2002 6:06:04 PM PDT
by
Bogie
To: Jim Robinson
FreeRepublic LIVES!!!
Congrats Jim.
To: Jim Robinson; parsifal
"They claimed we are a commercial for profit site." Based on what??? One of the glorious things about this site is the blessed absence of commercial enterprise. What morons!
Parsy, do you have an enlightened legal opinion as to how they can claim this is a commercial site?
To: Jim Robinson
June is the cruelest month. I guess 9:30 has come and gone.
To: nothingnew
Thank you for the ping. That is certainly good news.
I understand it is getting so bad over in Durango, that the airplanes are having to rely on their navigational equipment to land. Trying to land by sight at the airport is impossible.
I am still praying for rain. Hope HE answers that prayer soon!
To: Jim Robinson
The anti-freeps are going to have to go on Viagra just to be able to post after this gigantic letdown. What a bunch of pathetic parasites.
To: SpookBrat; MeeknMing; SassyMom; kneezles
I think the two lovely ladies makes it worth posting.
And the guys are sorta good lookin', too, although I'm not usually a judge of guys' looks...
Whaddya say, Meekie?
389
posted on
06/19/2002 6:20:12 PM PDT
by
HiJinx
To: Jim Robinson
Free Republic is alive and well and the fight against liberalism continues on.
This is a good thing - A very GOOD thing!
390
posted on
06/19/2002 6:24:47 PM PDT
by
Drumbo
To: Jim Robinson
Oh, man. Eschoir is going to jump off a building. He lived for the destruction of FR. His life has no meaning. (Well, actually it didn't have meaning before so this won't be much of a change.)
To: SpookBrat; MeeknMing
We just ate dinner and drank beer. That's all What else can you do in Hooters? BTW, thanks for the pictures but can you put a name to the faces there? Thanks.
To: piasa
LOL! Men can hold a whole celler :)
To: Jim Robinson
Congratulations, Jim. I know it's been a long, hard road to this point. Be proud of yourself for sticking to your guns.
To: drudge
ping
395
posted on
06/19/2002 6:36:59 PM PDT
by
TLBSHOW
To: Cool Guy; MeeknMing; HiJinx; homeschool mama
![](http://home.attbi.com/~perkins0226/GROUP.JPG)
I'm on the far left, my husband is behind me (he is not a FReeper). SassyMom is to your right (my left) and her husband Kneezles is behind her. "Meek the Sweet" is on the end in the white Dallas Cowboy T-shirt.
Meek is one of the nicest human beings I have ever had the pleasure of knowing. He is a gracious, gentle, kind man. And he's a CONSERVATIVE!!! I'm crazy about him. "I'm your #1 fan" Meek. LOL
Sassy is a lovely woman also. She and I have become good friends. Her husband is a hoot and a total blast to hang out with. I miss them all very much. I won't get to see them for awhile. Sniff...
To: SpookBrat
Thanks for the names. So can you also tell me the names of the gals in the other thread? :P
To: doug from upland
Hi, Doug. We need a ballad or something in honor of Jim.
To: sweetliberty
Judge Morrow wrote in her final opinion that FreeRepublic was "minimally commercial" that it exhibits many non-profit-like qualities, but was none-the-less "minimally commercial." Couldn't tell you offhand why for sure and don't want to make unsure guesses on this thread.
If FreeRepublic did not have this "minimally commercial" distinction as written in her opinion, FreeRepublic would have probably won a second point of four used to assess fair use. FR easily won consideration for the character and nature of the work used, and easily lost the consideration for the amount of work reproduced. I forget what the other consideration was (there are four considerations in assessing fair use) but FR lost that as well. In short, it would have weighed much more favorably to have won 2 of 4 considerations (though it is anybody's guess how this Judge would have weighted such considerations.)
To: Jim Robinson
Awwwww....those poor purveyors of 'truth' and 'freedom of the depressed'
Good show!!
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 361-380, 381-400, 401-420 ... 661-663 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson