"Roger Schlafly" wrote in message
...
"Hagrinas Mivali" wrote:
No, it might very well be fair use. Has the copyright owner
complained? If the owner doesn't complain, then why should you?
Whether a copyright owner complains or not has nothing to do with
whether
a
copyright holder objects.

So? Is the copyright owner objecting and not telling anyone
about it? If so, how would you know?


I know because the author placed a copyright notice with the work. That
made it clear that the author did not want it copied illegally. It's absurd
to argue that the author did not complain. The author included a NOTICE.
That's stronger than a complaint. It's also absurd to think that the author
will scour Usenet to see if the article was posted illegally. If the author
did complain, it would be to the OP, and not in a public forum.


You said:
"It's never considered fair use under copyright law to quote a substantial
newspaper article in its entirety without the author's permission."

That just isn't correct. It is often considered fair use to copy
an entire newspaper article.


Because you said so? What you said and what I said are two different things
anyway, but I'd just as soon go by what copyright law says instead of what
you say. What would be the point of even having a copyright law if people
could just publish your entire work without your permission and you could do
nothing about it?