LWC, you are missing a critical difference between a quote and a cut n’ paste. The attribute. Put a HT: with a name after the C’NP and presto-chango, it’s a quote and protected by reams of law,
That said, never forget the law isn’t a line so much as a string. It can be and is adjusted to the point where one can walk pretty much where one wants without stepping over the string/line. That is what Lawyers do, argue over where the string should be.
Judges decide who has the superior string position. Juries (under those legal systems that use juries) decide if the line/string was crossed. That slack in the string is called ‘justice’.
There is no need to set up standards, since those standards already exist in the form of what might be the worlds oldest international treaty. We are just debating the relative position of string and feet.
I disagree with LwC. The law distinguishes between fact and fiction in writing. LwC wants to treat an AP story as if it was a work of fiction. I won’t argue against that, since so much of their work IS fiction. AP’s entire existence is based around selling FACTS to news organizations that then package and re-sell those facts. Yet AP is claiming the rights of a fiction writer.
IMHO, to sell fiction as fact is FRAUD.
So AP has to decide. Fact or Fiction? If they are selling facts, they have to live with the laws concerning facts, which means no copyright protection. Fair usage applies and ANYONE can C’NP so long as they attribute.
This really needs to go to court. Let the system work like it was designed to.
AP doesn’t want to go to court. That would be VERY awkward for them. They want to use the threat of court to intimidate bloggers. Not sure where the string lies on that.
One would think that Lawmail was at least against the ethics code (stop laughing, that wasn’t a joke) of the legal profession. I’ll bet a clever Lawyer could stretch the laws against torture to cover that.
