L.A. Times vs Free Republic

[Keirsey]

If anyone wonders why the mods here limit the quoting of new articles, etc. to four paragraphs, this should explain it (Fair Use).

The defendant Free Republic operated a bulletin board service and web site on which its members posted verbatim copies of articles that appeared in the plaintiff’s newspapers, The Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post, ostensibly so that the defendant’s members could post comments about the articles and their content. It was conceded that often these copies constituted the entirety of the articles as they appeared in both the print and electronic copies of the paper. The defense raised was that such reposting was “fair use” under the United States Copyright Law.

>snip<
During the pendency of the case, the defendants web site was realizing around 100,000 visitors per day and between 25 and 50 million page views a month. The Court also noted that the defendant operated a for profit, limited liability company and found that this site was capable of generating revenue for the defendant in a number of different ways.

http://www.ivanhoffman.com/fair2.html

[Cha]

1. Well there ya go..reasons to limit the paragraphs as the

rules stipulate.

[Lefty48197]

2. That's scary as hell

100,000 of those psychotic right wing freaks running around loose in this country?

[Eric J in MN]

3. How does their website make a profit? nt

nt

[NuttyFluffers]

5. well after a good lawsuit, it won't for a while, ha ha ha

there is a god, he just lashes out revenge in the most amusing of ways.

[freetobegay]

4. how many of those 100,000 are split personalities?