[upchuck]

Pardon me. I did not ask why you POSTED the article, I asked why you excerpted it. In your smart-ass response (#20), you indicate this article deals with a worthy topic and I agree. So, why did you EXCERPT this article?

[I Hired Craig Livingstone]

Pardon me. I did not ask why you POSTED the article, I asked why you excerpted it. In your smart-ass response (#20), you indicate this article deals with a worthy topic and I agree. So, why did you EXCERPT this article?

It appears the sidebar moderator did it. Newsweek is covered in the WP/LA Times agreement.

[The Great Satan]

I believe we are enjoined from posting Newsweak articles in full, as a result of the Washington Post lawsuit.

[Norman Conquest]

Because WashPost Company (which owns Newsweak) won't grant permission to post in full?

[spetznaz]

My sincere apologies Upchuck. I totally misconstrued your post (i guess because just last week some Freeper told me to 'watch what i say on FR and not to go against the grain' when i posted a statement he did not feel comfortable with). Thus i apologize for jumping into conclusions.

Anyways to answer your real question. The reason i exerpted it is because the Moderator informed me that any article from NewsWeek/MSNBC has to be exerpted. Furthermore when i originally posted this article i had the entire article, however a Moderator truncated almost all of it (apart from the two paragraphs you see) and hence for someone to read it they have to go to the excerpt link.

That is why.

Anyways again i am sorry for rushing off in judgement.

[dark_lord]

In general, we are not supposed to copy/paste an entire article. It violates copyright. Therefore we are supposed to exerpt and provide a link.

There are organizations that would like to see this forum disappear - and sueing for copyright violations and then having fines issued is a way to do that.