Updated FR Excerpt and Link Only or Deny Posting List due to Copyright Complaints

April 5, 2004 | Jim Robinson

[Joe Hadenuf]

It's growing Jim....

[South40]

antiwar.com?

What a tragedy.

[Joe Hadenuf]

bsudailynews.com

BSU daily? lol......

[BunnySlippers]

How about Vanity Fair? I thought they were off.

[b4its2late]

Their loss, boss.

[hellinahandcart]

Bookmarking and saying "what a coincidence in this election year"...

[johnfrink]

Studlife.com???

Dare I ask?

[I still care]

I know there are legal considerations, but what happens is, the original story disappears, and things I have bookmarked to keep are only stuck with an excerpt.

Also, some people get TOO enthusiastic and excerpt everything.

[TomGuy]

I read an article a week or so ago that Reuters is disallowing any unauthorized postings of their news articles. They are claiming copyright violation.

[Willie Green]

Maybe my bifocals missed it, but it looks like you forgot one.

Cease and Desist: Business Week Suppresses our Free Speech Rights

[upchuck]

Thank you Jim for this consolidated list. Excerpting for no reason seems to be rampant lately. Maybe this list will help.

For those articles that must be excerpted, I'd like to request that FReepers, when possible, link to the "printer friendly" version of the article. Way fewer graphics to wade through and hardly ever any popup ads. Those of us stuck in "56K" hell thank you :)

[muawiyah]

Those "Tribune" affiliates ~ one of their member is currently subject to a RICO investigation.

'Nuff said on that until they come down with the indictments that name names.

Once they get into the trials betcha' the Tribune people will lose their focus on allegations of copyright violations.

[lelio]

And before everyone rushes off to check it out, studlife.com is a website about student life at Washington University in St Louis.

[Jeff Head]

They are all practicing a form of self-censorship...very revealing. I suppose it is because many of them are afraid of principled, reasoning, conservative people discussing their stories and exposing many of those stories for what they are.

Says much as to what a number of these organizations would be like to other viewpoints if they ever really had any true reign of power. Heck, many of them can't stand their own messages seeing the light of day and truth...what do you think they would do to contrary opinions if given the chance?

[hellinahandcart]

These publishers have asked us not to allow any material at all to be posted to FR: washingtondispatch.com

Now that's interesting, since it was usually the authors posting one-sentence excerpts here themselves...

and what the heck is studlife.com?

[CounterCounterCulture]

Studlife.com???

Student Life - Washington University in St. Louis.

yes, I had to check ;-)

[GRRRRR]

Does that mean if I see an interesting article at pcworld.com that I can't say: "I saw an interesting article at PCWorld.Com and is a link."? Please advise... Maybe I should cancel my subscription to them? G

[NormsRevenge]

BUMP

Thanks for the list!

[Ed_in_NJ]

Have you responded in kind -- telling these bozoes that they are not to make any use of anything they see on FR?

[Jim Robinson]

I think you're right. Guess I forgot that one. Will add them to the list.
Thanks,
Jim

[mlmr]

Are we going to take this to court again. There is something spooky about not being able to post the articles or even post links to some of the articles. There is a dislike of being tracked or held accountable here....

[CyberCowboy777]

oregonmag.com?

That is a little strange.

[Jim Robinson]

Hmmm... don't think I heard back from their CEO. But, what the heck, if they don't want their material on FR so be it. I'll add them to the list.

[Dan from Michigan]

Got it and BTTT.

[Jim Robinson]

Don't have the financial wherewithal to go to court again. Have simply complied with their wishes.
Jim

[Jim Robinson]

No. Just hope they spell our name right when they use our material. Every time we're mentioned in the press (favorable or not) it brings in a lot of new posters.

[johnfrink]

Ok. But, of course, that brings up an entirely different question, like why the heck do they care about being cited on FR? Weird. But kudos to the genius who got the studlife.com URL for them.

[Jim Robinson]

Well, you could probably do that. I doubt they'd sue for that. If they do, oh well.

[ExSoldier]

Wow, I am seriously surprised to see the Sun Sentinel on the list. I am also surprised that the Miami Herald is NOT on the list. Maybe they have more guts than I thought.

[Willie Green]

But, what the heck, if they don't want their material on FR so be it. I'll add them to the list.

As I recall, we pretty much reached a consensus that BW's articles were fairly mediocre anyway.

[mlmr]

Would ACLU or Rutherford or any other free speech group work with us?

[nutmeg]

ping!

Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent ‘miscellaneous’ ping list.

[Fledermaus]

I can understand the ones that only will allow excerpts with links. Makes sense since they want hits to their websites.

But the small list of cowards that don't want even mentioned shows how small their minds are. I wonder if they send out spies to cocktail parties to make sure no one mentions them there also! lol

[curmudgeonII]

I'm astounded that jewishworldrevew is on this list.
The editor is one of the good guys.

[Dan from Michigan]

I'll also say this. When I was a PAC treasurer for a certain organization, anytime one of our press releases or stories came out, our Exec Director wanted it posted here.

More readers see it, then go to our site to see what else goes on.

[theFIRMbss]

>antiwar.com? What a tragedy.

Well, we are still cool with Kournikova dot com. We still have Anna! *

---------------------------------------------------------
* "Ever wondered what music Anna likes listening to?
Anna has revealed her top 5 favorite songs for 2003!

They are:

1. Not in Love (by Enrique Iglesias)
2. Unwell (by Matchbox 20)
3. Addicted (by Enrique Iglesias)
4. Here Without You (by Three Doors Down)
5. The Voice Within You (by Christina Aguilera)"

[Dan from Michigan]

The Detroit Free Press isn't either. (Same company). My local rag isn't either(small company, probably gets more hits).

My guess is that they want us PO'ED all the time so we post it. Then we go back and see it again next week, and the following, etc.

More read their site, etc.

[Jim Robinson]

Perhaps. But it's still awful expensive and time consuming to go to the mat with these people considering the fact that it'd have to go all the way to the supreme court no matter which side wins or loses in the lower courts.

[billorites]

"I'm astounded that jewishworldrevew is on this list."

I'm sympathetic.

He needs the hits.

It's a one-man operation dependent on hits for advertising bucks.

(I miss Napster)

[RonDog]

ping

[mlmr]

But it is an important issue. For it is an issue about the freedom and disemination of information in this country. When people are not permitted to link to information or when the information disappears, the history and collective memory of our country is endangered. Of course it will go to the Supreme Court. and it will take millions. But it needs to. The Internet has changed the rules and we need to shape the change.

[muawiyah]

I'm guessing that antiwar.com doesn't want their s**t posted on FR because many of us take it and use it for purposes of humor elsewhere, frequently on other mind-numbed robot-like knee-jerk liberal sites!

If it wasn't posted here, we wouldn't know about it (presumably).

[hellinahandcart]

I'm guessing that antiwar.com doesn't want their s**t posted on FR because many of us take it and use it for purposes of humor elsewhere

No, it's because Raimondo had a hissy fit here after one of the antiwar.com writers pleaded guilty to terrorism charges and was sent to prison for a couple of decades (one of the "paintball" guys in Virginia).

His exit thread is kind of amusing, if I can find it.

[Willie Green]

Wow, I am seriously surprised to see the Sun Sentinel on the list.

If I'm not mistaken, I think they're part of the LAT/WP empire.

[tpaine]

Does that mean if I see an interesting article at pcworld.com that I can't say: "I saw an interesting article at PCWorld.Com and is a link."? Please advise... Maybe I should cancel my subscription to them?
19 GRRRRR

______________________________________

Well, you could probably do that. I doubt they'd sue for that. If they do, oh well.
30 -JR-

______________________________________

Hmmmm.. -- I see the lead story over at PC today says:

"Do You Really Need a New PC?"
There are lots of reasons to buy a new PC.

Not if you old one still works OK, fellas..

But there's also lots of ways to upgrade an old PC with, say, a new CPU.

Hey, thats more like it! Tell me more!

Now how in hell can PC sue you for what I just posted, --- if we are we still living in a free republic?

[DonaldDuke]

antiwar.com?

Bah. Who'd want their writing? The "behindnews" is so dripping with Justin's obsessions that it's like reading a psychiatrist's journal. Or watching Bedlam through a one-way mirror.

[muawiyah]

Didn't catch that. You mean one of the boys "down the street" who went to stir over their terrorist training was an antiwar.com writer?

And here I thought most of those guys were just engineers and taxicab drivers.

My eldest saw the federales (and 35,000 other kinds of cops) take one of 'em down on a Sunday afternoon. Shut the neighborhood down to do it.

AlQaida and it's buddies failed to notice that Iraqi defectors and Kurdish refugees had moved into that neighborhood in large numbers.

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

IMPORTANT INFO REGARDING LINKING ARTICLES AND DO NOT LINK INFO PING