The reply below is an example of taking something out of context. The context was the J.A.I.L. founder Ron Branson's criticism/comment/news reporting of the information in the article. It would have been better had I preceded the full post with the notice "For educational purposes, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107" or, more completely, "NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes." (As at http://gastricbypass.netfirms.com/otherside.htm ) A search of Google with the words ""Title 17 U.S.C. section 107" yields 368 hits. The first one is http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html, defining fair use. Alexandra On Thu, 17 May 2001 11:09:25 -0400 "Paula Wiegand" <[email protected]> writes: > On 17 May 2001, at 9:30, [email protected] wrote: > > I can't believe this copyrighted article was sent to a list whose > purpose is the discussion of copyright law! > > > Los Angeles, California May 16, 2001 > > > > Union Tribune > > By Kathryn Balint > > STAFF WRITER > > May 13, 2001 > > > > Copyright 2001 Union-Tribune Publishing Co. > > > ==== COPYRIGHT Mailing List ==== > Searchable archives at > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=copyright > > ============================== > Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & > Celebrate > your heritage! > http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog >
On 17 May 2001, at 11:43, [email protected] wrote: > The reply below is an example of taking something out of context. The > context was the J.A.I.L. founder Ron Branson's criticism/comment/news > reporting of the information in the article. What a ridiculous comment. You sent a copyrighted article without the copyright holder's permission. That the Union-Tribune article was used to put Ron Branson's copyrighted comments in context has no bearing whatsoever on my incredulity. > "NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material > is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior > interest in receiving the included information for research and > educational purposes." (As at > http://gastricbypass.netfirms.com/otherside.htm ) I fail to see how the Weight Loss Surgery Information Center can be considered an authority on copyright law. > A search of Google with the words ""Title 17 U.S.C. section 107" > yields 368 hits. The first one is > http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html, defining fair use. > Alexandra Did you miss the four factors used by the courts to determine fair use? I draw your attention to: (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and the US Copyright Office FAQ, answer to question 60 (at http://www.loc.gov/copyright/faq.html#q60 ) which states in part: There are circumstances under the fair use doctrine where a quote or a sample may be used without permission. However, in cases of doubt, the Copyright Office recommends that permission be obtained." Paula [email protected]