U.S. is losing the sympathy of the world

"Alan Lothian" wrote in message
...
In article , John
Mullen wrote:

Richard Bernstein, NYT
Reprinted in the International Herald Tribune.

U.S. is losing the sympathy of the world

snip of loads of stuff distributed around the Net in gross breach of
copyright

Having had a look at the Copyright notices of both publications, it seems
you are (technically) right here. Morally, I would contend that crediting
online sources you have lifted text from for a non-profit purpose such as
this, is sufficient. Certainly it's a very common practice. After all,
anybody who wants to can read it online in the original.

The sympathy of the world (whatever the hell "world" means in that
context) plus two euros will buy you a cup of coffee in some capital
cities.

??? Don't get your drift at all.

This post should not be understood as implying support for any US
policy, past, present or future, but merely as a small contribution to
the War against Bull****, which is both more pressing and more
important than the War against Terrorism.

Obviously I didn't think the article I posted was bull****, I thought it was
intreresting and well-written. What made you think it was bull****?

John

In article , John
Mullen wrote:

"Alan Lothian" wrote in message
...
In article , John
Mullen wrote:

The sympathy of the world (whatever the hell "world" means in that
context) plus two euros will buy you a cup of coffee in some capital
cities.

??? Don't get your drift at all.

Then there's no point in my trying to explain it.

--
"The past resembles the future as water resembles water" Ibn Khaldun

My .mac.com address is a spam sink.
If you wish to email me, try alan dot lothian at blueyonder dot co dot uk

On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 13:34:57 +0100, "John Mullen" wrote:

"Alan Lothian" wrote in message
...
In article , John
Mullen wrote:

Richard Bernstein, NYT
Reprinted in the International Herald Tribune.

U.S. is losing the sympathy of the world

snip of loads of stuff distributed around the Net in gross breach of
copyright

Having had a look at the Copyright notices of both publications, it seems
you are (technically) right here. Morally, I would contend that crediting
online sources you have lifted text from for a non-profit purpose such as
this, is sufficient. Certainly it's a very common practice. After all,
anybody who wants to can read it online in the original.


Ever heard of fair use, or the newswothiness exception?

Do you think "copyright notices" fully and fairly inform you of the
law? Which of course varies in different jurisdictions.

On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 13:34:57 +0100, John Mullen wrote:
"Alan Lothian" wrote in message
...
In article , John
Mullen wrote:

Richard Bernstein, NYT
Reprinted in the International Herald Tribune.

U.S. is losing the sympathy of the world

snip of loads of stuff distributed around the Net in gross breach of
copyright

Having had a look at the Copyright notices of both publications, it seems
you are (technically) right here. Morally, I would contend that crediting
online sources you have lifted text from for a non-profit purpose such as
this, is sufficient. Certainly it's a very common practice.

This is true of lots of antisocial activities.

After all,
anybody who wants to can read it online in the original.

I disagree. Posting a paragraph or precis and refering to the whole
article is acceptable. Shoveling entire articles into discussion
groups is not.


--
A: top posting

Q: what's the most annoying thing about Usenet?