Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

penultimate

(1,110 posts)

10. Confused me too, well, until I thought about it. They probably don't oppose the concept at all

Reply to Incitatus (Reply #8)

Fri Nov 15, 2013, 12:26 AM

Nov 2013

but they just want to make money from it. At least that would be my best guess. Kinda dickish of the authors if that's the case, because it does seem like it does them a service.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

11 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Google defeats authors in U.S. book-scanning lawsuit [View all] Eugene Nov 2013 OP

Good to see 'fair use' win a victory... PoliticAverse Nov 2013 #1

Good. Copyright has been so twisted out of shape.. MicaelS Nov 2013 #2

Laws? Martak Sarno Nov 2013 #3

If they are scanning for their search engine dbackjon Nov 2013 #4

The copyright law should revert to its earlier form instead of tying written works shraby Nov 2013 #5

Apparently some publishers are using the copyright law to keep older works off the market... PoliticAverse Nov 2013 #7

25 years is plenty long enough. MicaelS Nov 2013 #9

You can under fair use. Just not the whole thing. Dash87 Nov 2013 #6

How does it only benefit the 1% but not everyone else? Also, how does it harm the authors? penultimate Nov 2013 #11

I don't see why authors would oppose this. Incitatus Nov 2013 #8

Confused me too, well, until I thought about it. They probably don't oppose the concept at all penultimate Nov 2013 #10