Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ZGuy
One can only presume that Scientific American (and National Geographic) had the ‘wind taken out of their sails.’ Dr Sarfati convincingly showed that they offered nothing new to the debate and they displayed a glaring ignorance of creationist arguments. Their legal maneuver appears to be an act of desperation. (AiG is still awaiting SA’s response to the decision not to pull the Web rebuttal.)

No, that's not what one can "only assume." I hate defending SciAm because they're so off the deep end lately, but due to the way copyright law works, they're compelled to threaten anyone who uses anything of theirs in any way. This is why Disney goes after mom & pop day care centers that use a drawing of, say, Snow White based on the Disney design. There was a thread here on FR not long ago about how one avant garde musician wrote a :60 track consisting of total silence. He was promptly sued by the attorneys for an avant garde composer who had previously written a piece that was four minutes of silence.

Naturally, the musician said his silence was in no way related to the other silence.

At this point, I have nothing to say regarding the validity of the arguments on either side.

12 posted on 07/11/2002 10:04:28 AM PDT by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Gumlegs
I hate defending SciAm because they're so off the deep end lately, but due to the way copyright law works, they're compelled to threaten anyone who uses anything of theirs in any way. This is why Disney goes after mom & pop day care centers that use a drawing of, say, Snow White based on the Disney design.

You are confusing copyrights with trademarks. One doesn't have to work to keep copyright enfringment ripe. And if there was ever a better example of fair use -- using the copyrighted text only to demonstrate the argument, so one can rebut it -- I've never heard of it.

55 posted on 07/11/2002 10:43:07 AM PDT by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Gumlegs
one avant garde musician wrote a :60 track consisting of total silence. He was promptly sued by the attorneys for an avant garde composer who had previously written a piece that was four minutes of silence. Naturally, the musician said his silence was in no way related to the other silence.

LMFAO!!!

Okay that's one of the most futzed-up things I've read on FR all day...

Time to call it a day...

216 posted on 07/11/2002 2:04:56 PM PDT by maxwell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson