[nicollo]

I see you've resigned to plaintiff's interpretation of fair use in terms of full-text posting. I can appreciate this, if only in terms of this case (a notion you and Bryan seem to put forth). The nice thing is that nothing has been conceded in the legal record.

The irony here is that the WP/LAT silence themselves just as they pull the plug on the FR microphone. So be it. They have a larger foot to lose, and they'll bleed more, besides.

So I gather that the strategy is to take this case as example and go at it one at a time. That's all very well, and I doubt anyone can expect more than an agreement to limit postings to a paragraph or two. The burden is upon them, now.

I still believe firmly that full article posting is crucial to our mission and integral to our rights.

I never liked "mirror" posts, and I don't like use of photos, especially those that are not newsworthy. I concede no comparison to our use of full-text articles.

It's sad, then. My first article posted here was a copy of the (com)Post '98 annual report. I was amazed that they buried the cost of the .com section. Could I post it again? Or is an SEC document covered by this agreement?

See what I mean?

[Jim Robinson]

We can post their financial statements. That's public information. Hoping this will all work out for the best. We're a long ways from dead, in fact we're alive and kicking as hard as ever.

By the way, thanks for the book you sent me.

Regards,

Jim Robinson