"Brunibus" wrote in message
...
"M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t-April 11, 2004" M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t
wrote in message
t...
"Brunibus" wrote in message
...
"M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t-April 11, 2004" M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t
wrote in message
t...
"Brunibus" wrote in message
...
"Hagrinas Mivali" wrote in message
. com...
"Psi" wrote in message
om...
FAIR USE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of
which
has
not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner.
We
are
making such material available in our efforts to advance
understanding
of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic,
scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this
constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided
for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with
Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is
distributed
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and
educational
purposes. For more information, click here. If you wish to use
copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own
that
go
beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright
owner.
It's never considered fair use under copyright law to quote a
substantial
newspaper article in its entirety without the author's
permission.
A
disclaimer does not make it so. Since readers of this newsgroup
did
NOT
request that information, the rest of your statement is nonsense
too.
You
did not send it to individuals who requested it, but to a public
forum.
Hello ..... ?
The poster's not making any money out of it.
In fact, he's doing the author a favour by increasing its
readership
for
free.
The source is quoted in the post.
What makes you think the author would have an issue with having it
posted
for free and with a reference ?
Your attitude is bizarrely anal, to say the least !
Unbelievable !
Actually, the attitude is right on. Whether one makes money out of
it
or
not
is not the issue. The OP clearly violated Fair Use,
More bizarreness.
Only in your "mind."
How is it unfair to ANYONE ?
Strawman. Who said it was unfair?
Why did you raise violation of fair use ?
Check your reading comprehension upthread. I did not *raise* the issue of
Fair Use, but commented on the fact that the OP, IMNSHO, violated it.
I'm sorry, but you're just too out there to be normal.
Aha, the fallacy of offensive diagnosis. Well done. Strawman first, then OD
second. I just cannot wait for a red herring, or some other fallacious
argument.
And, I see that you stopped reading too soon, again.
Maybe I'm just a lame-brain, but I'm having severe trouble seeing
exactly
who the loser in all this might be.
You stopped reading my excellently written message too soon. I clearly
pointed out who the first loser is. You can read the rest below.
The first loser in this is the OP, since s/h/its credibility went down
the
crapper for violating fair use. If they cannot be honest in such simple
things, then can they be honest in anything? I say not.
and this reflects on the
character and ethics of the OP. BTW, the OP is a long time re-poster
of
this
type of material and is mindlessly anti-psychaitry.