Sophisticated Yet Humble
Let me give you some translation hints for an expert peddling legal bullshit:William D. Richards Yes, it is. You are essentially republishing it. Fair Use Doctrine does allow you to copy a line or two if it is relevant to your review of the article, but not the whole thing.
There are people who have tried this very action to get around a copyright and post a written work for free, claiming they were ‘reviewing’ the piece in question. They have lost badly in court. So, it is best to not to do this.
... No off you pop [literally] go get those magic bullet mRNA BOOOOSTERS!
Yeah I get all that. I know BB is doing some a favor by the copy-paste. Nothing commercial about it. my post above was from Average Joes, and Joes feel it's not ok when there's a paywall. Who cares whether mumbo jumbo proves up? Not me, but I am certain, not essentially but real certain, that "content providers" as writers are now called, want to be paid for their work. That's what this issue is about. Copying and pasting entire riffs to work around a paywall ain't OK. Attribution or not. I don't care how they do it in Vermont or CT.Let me give you some translation hints for an expert peddling legal bullshit:
Anytime an expert says something is "essentially" something, replace the word 'essentially' with 'not really' for accuracy. "You are essentially republishing it" should read "You are not really republishing it."
Anytime an expert says 'there are people who have..." something, replace the word "are" with "must be". "There must be people who have tried this very action..."
What he should have written is something like:
"the interplay between the Fair Use Doctrine and Section 230 of the CDMA means that forum site operators can almost never be successfully sued for the existence of User-Generated Content (UGC) infringing a copyright on a forum, unless they ignore properly submitted DMCA takedown notices for the UGC or have specifically encouraged the posting of infringing material. Negligence does not suffice. A copyright holder suing an individual forum member posting infringing content is severely limited by the Copyright Act in damages they can recoverr unless there is evidence that the infringer was 'willful', which is nearly impossible to prove with regard to a person who is not somehow financially profiting off the posting. On the other hand, a paid forum contributor or someone who uses their forum personality to otherwise operate commercially - like an influencer or podcaster - could very easily see serious financial liability for posting the protected work of others with no Fair Use or other justification. Because of the extensive effort and expense required to bring a successful infringement action under the Copyright Act and many years of evidence that large-scale actions (remember Napster?) fail to provide any deterrent effect while creating PR nightmares, few IP owners choose to police non-commercial uses, focusing instead on pursuing violators with a commercial connection to the infringement and/or deep pockets."
OK, let's take this one thing at a time.THE TRUTH!! about medical science…PMSL
(a. Something bad is happening that becomes blatantly obvious
(b. A small minority of people point out that the “thing” is blatantly obvious
(c. These people are bullied, attacked, accused of killing Grandma, ridiculed and cancelled then “time passes”
(d. The “experts” concede the blatantly obvious thing was correct
(e. No apologies
a bit of a stretch to infer that from his comments.And you like that to apply to the whole population wouldn't you?
I’d hate to be out on the water, in trouble, only to find out the Coasties are shorthanded because of Covid politics. Those seven dumbasses volunteered to risk their lives when someone like you or me get in trouble. There is absolutely no reason those 7 couldn’t have served on a shore based detail other than politics. If you’re so much better, volunteer to replace one of them.7 dumbasses we don't need in the service.
Here's where ya went off the tracks.There is absolutely no reason those 7 couldn’t have served on a shore based detail other than politics
7 service people who can’t follow orders? Yeah, I can see why the commanders don’t want them.I’d hate to be out on the water, in trouble, only to find out the Coasties are shorthanded because of Covid politics. Those seven dumbasses volunteered to risk their lives when someone like you or me get in trouble. There is absolutely no reason those 7 couldn’t have served on a shore based detail other than politics. If you’re so much better, volunteer to replace one of them.
Nonsense. There’s a massive portion of the Coast Guard who operate from shore bases. I can totally understand the vax rules for ship based personnel.Here's where ya went off the tracks.
You’ve never been in the military, have you? These are first year cadets, at the academy in dorms. They have no idea what their ultimate assignment might be at this stage in their careers, but right now, they are college students, on campus, and often aboard ship as part of their duties.Nonsense. There’s a massive portion of the Coast Guard who operate from shore bases. I can totally understand the vax rules for ship based personnel.