People often think that if they credit the author, it's OK. If the author is credited, then it's not plaigerism, which is a different offense, but it's still copyright infringement if over 10% of the work is reproduced.
Copyright is intended to protect the author/artist/composer and his or her publishers (the Big Pockets in the equation) and allow the person who created the work to have control over its use and any income derived from it, including potential income. Unless a person has explicit permission to republish someone else's work, any such act is infringement of copyright.
The law doesn't exactly permit people to reproduce works for private use, either, but that's much harder to detect.
I was pretty sure you didn't know. On this particular occasion, you were not the person I was yelling at. I'm pleased that you're going to "reform"; do this to a touchy writer and you can find yourself in court looking at the wrong end of a substantial fine.
Current Events » in reply to Fair use does not permit posting articles?
'fraid not...
The whole thread (26 posts)
- A deconstruciton of the Bush Derangement Syndrome
- Deconstructionalism is..........
- re: What if Ed did intend to step into that?
- re: LOL LOL !
- Is this now going to become a conversation where popular terms get to be redefined?
- Deconstructionalism is..........