New revenue stream for newspapers puts the squeez on bloggers.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...g-for-dollars/


Best Regards
Tom.

"azotic" wrote in message
...
New revenue stream for newspapers puts the squeez on bloggers.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...g-for-dollars/


Best Regards
Tom.

If a writer cannot read an article, or follow a publication, or research an
event or subject, then rewrite it and not change enough at least to comply
with, or have a plausible argument against alleged copyright infringement,
they need to put down their pen because they are not a writer, but a cut and
paster, and need to go down in a flaming trail of twenty dollar bills.
Maybe it will thin out the herd of cut and paste bloggers who couldn't pass
a first year creative writing class.

Steve

visit my blog at http://cabgbypasssurgery.com

On 07/26/2010 12:50 PM, Steve B wrote:
wrote in message
...
New revenue stream for newspapers puts the squeez on bloggers.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...g-for-dollars/


Best Regards
Tom.

If a writer cannot read an article, or follow a publication, or research an
event or subject, then rewrite it and not change enough at least to comply
with, or have a plausible argument against alleged copyright infringement,
they need to put down their pen because they are not a writer, but a cut and
paster, and need to go down in a flaming trail of twenty dollar bills.
Maybe it will thin out the herd of cut and paste bloggers who couldn't pass
a first year creative writing class.

The idealistic part of me wants to believe that.

The cynical part of me believes that the brick & mortar houses are
finding a way to cut down the competition.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Do you need to implement control loops in software?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" was written for you.
See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html

On 2010-07-26, Tim Wescott wrote:
On 07/26/2010 12:50 PM, Steve B wrote:
wrote in message
...
New revenue stream for newspapers puts the squeez on bloggers.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...g-for-dollars/


Best Regards
Tom.

If a writer cannot read an article, or follow a publication, or research an
event or subject, then rewrite it and not change enough at least to comply
with, or have a plausible argument against alleged copyright infringement,
they need to put down their pen because they are not a writer, but a cut and
paster, and need to go down in a flaming trail of twenty dollar bills.
Maybe it will thin out the herd of cut and paste bloggers who couldn't pass
a first year creative writing class.

The idealistic part of me wants to believe that.

The cynical part of me believes that the brick & mortar houses are
finding a way to cut down the competition.


Very clever idea. Let's say that I find an interesting newspaper
article and post it in thie newsgroup. If Steve Gibson finds me, he
could very conceivably shake me down for a few grand.

i

"Tim Wescott" wrote in message
...
On 07/26/2010 12:50 PM, Steve B wrote:
wrote in message
...
New revenue stream for newspapers puts the squeez on bloggers.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...g-for-dollars/


Best Regards
Tom.

If a writer cannot read an article, or follow a publication, or research
an
event or subject, then rewrite it and not change enough at least to
comply
with, or have a plausible argument against alleged copyright
infringement,
they need to put down their pen because they are not a writer, but a cut
and
paster, and need to go down in a flaming trail of twenty dollar bills.
Maybe it will thin out the herd of cut and paste bloggers who couldn't
pass
a first year creative writing class.

The idealistic part of me wants to believe that.

The cynical part of me believes that the brick & mortar houses are finding
a way to cut down the competition.

When they steal your product and then sell it to compete with you, it's a
seriously grating experience.

We have fair-use provisions in the Copyright Act. The bloggers, and many
others online, have just abused it to steal.

None of this applies to links, by the way. It's about wholesale lifting of
copy.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ignoramus2966" wrote in message
...
On 2010-07-26, Tim Wescott wrote:
On 07/26/2010 12:50 PM, Steve B wrote:
wrote in message
...
New revenue stream for newspapers puts the squeez on bloggers.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...g-for-dollars/


Best Regards
Tom.

If a writer cannot read an article, or follow a publication, or research
an
event or subject, then rewrite it and not change enough at least to
comply
with, or have a plausible argument against alleged copyright
infringement,
they need to put down their pen because they are not a writer, but a cut
and
paster, and need to go down in a flaming trail of twenty dollar bills.
Maybe it will thin out the herd of cut and paste bloggers who couldn't
pass
a first year creative writing class.

The idealistic part of me wants to believe that.

The cynical part of me believes that the brick & mortar houses are
finding a way to cut down the competition.


Very clever idea. Let's say that I find an interesting newspaper
article and post it in thie newsgroup. If Steve Gibson finds me, he
could very conceivably shake me down for a few grand.

Nope. He'd have to show that you made money off of it to win anything. He
may write you a legal letter, and he could even get a cease-and-desist
order. But he can't win money damages, nor would you be charged with a
crime.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Tim Wescott" wrote in message
...
On 07/26/2010 12:50 PM, Steve B wrote:
wrote in message
...
New revenue stream for newspapers puts the squeez on bloggers.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...g-for-dollars/


Best Regards
Tom.

If a writer cannot read an article, or follow a publication, or research
an
event or subject, then rewrite it and not change enough at least to
comply
with, or have a plausible argument against alleged copyright
infringement,
they need to put down their pen because they are not a writer, but a cut
and
paster, and need to go down in a flaming trail of twenty dollar bills.
Maybe it will thin out the herd of cut and paste bloggers who couldn't
pass
a first year creative writing class.

The idealistic part of me wants to believe that.

The cynical part of me believes that the brick & mortar houses are
finding a way to cut down the competition.

When they steal your product and then sell it to compete with you, it's a
seriously grating experience.

We have fair-use provisions in the Copyright Act. The bloggers, and many
others online, have just abused it to steal.

None of this applies to links, by the way. It's about wholesale lifting of
copy.

--
Ed Huntress


The problem is the cost of defending ones self, its often cheaper
to pay off the the lawyers than fight to win a case. Looks like they
plan to file thousands of lawsuits in the hopes most will settle
before trial. Wanna bet the lawyers check on the offenders
abillity to pay before they sue. A homeless person posting to
thier blog from a public library wont get sued.

Best Regards
Tom.



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

Ignoramus2966 wrote:

Very clever idea. Let's say that I find an interesting newspaper
article and post it in thie newsgroup. If Steve Gibson finds me, he
could very conceivably shake me down for a few grand.


Spinrite Steve Gibson?

"Ed Huntress" wrote:

The cynical part of me believes that the brick & mortar houses are finding
a way to cut down the competition.

When they steal your product and then sell it to compete with you, it's a
seriously grating experience.

We have fair-use provisions in the Copyright Act. The bloggers, and many
others online, have just abused it to steal.

None of this applies to links, by the way. It's about wholesale lifting of
copy.

Ed, what is the time interval from having say, NBC news issue an original report on
something, to having the other networks parroting the same stuff that would not abuse
copyright?

Serious question, you understand this stuff better than anyone on the list.

Wes

On 7/26/2010 4:12 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Nope. He'd have to show that you made money off of it to win anything. He
may write you a legal letter, and he could even get a cease-and-desist
order. But he can't win money damages, nor would you be charged with a
crime.


Woot would seem to have a better case.

http://www.woot.com/blog/viewentry.aspx?id=13420

Kevin Gallimore

"Wes" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

The cynical part of me believes that the brick & mortar houses are
finding
a way to cut down the competition.

When they steal your product and then sell it to compete with you, it's a
seriously grating experience.

We have fair-use provisions in the Copyright Act. The bloggers, and many
others online, have just abused it to steal.

None of this applies to links, by the way. It's about wholesale lifting of
copy.

Ed, what is the time interval from having say, NBC news issue an original
report on
something, to having the other networks parroting the same stuff that
would not abuse
copyright?

Serious question, you understand this stuff better than anyone on the
list.

Wes

There's no copyright involved there, Wes. Copyright pertains to your exact
words, in the case of writing, or a close paraphrasing intended to copy what
you said without actually changing a thing. And the latter applies mostly to
works of fiction -- plays, movie scripts, etc.

There are other provisions, but in terms of blog entries and words on a
page, you just can't directly copy a "substantial" part of someone else's
work. I've seen some of my articles posted on the Web, in the early years,
but it didn't hurt me and I doubt if it made them any money, so I just let
it go. But if they screwed me up on something I intended to re-sell, I would
have raised hell.

"Fair use" also has several provisions. A paragraph from an article is Ok. A
parody or critique also is Ok.

--
Ed Huntress

"axolotl" wrote in message
...
On 7/26/2010 4:12 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Nope. He'd have to show that you made money off of it to win anything. He
may write you a legal letter, and he could even get a cease-and-desist
order. But he can't win money damages, nor would you be charged with a
crime.


Woot would seem to have a better case.

http://www.woot.com/blog/viewentry.aspx?id=13420

Kevin Gallimore

Woot has no case at all. That's fair use. Posting a link is not copyright
violation, and those few words are 'way inside of the Fair Use Doctrine.

They're just doing what they say they do for a living -- post junk. g

--
Ed Huntress

"Wes" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

The cynical part of me believes that the brick & mortar houses are
finding
a way to cut down the competition.

When they steal your product and then sell it to compete with you, it's a
seriously grating experience.

We have fair-use provisions in the Copyright Act. The bloggers, and many
others online, have just abused it to steal.

None of this applies to links, by the way. It's about wholesale lifting of
copy.

Ed, what is the time interval from having say, NBC news issue an original
report on
something, to having the other networks parroting the same stuff that
would not abuse
copyright?


Or they may all be buying the story from the AP.

"Ignoramus2966" wrote in message
...
On 2010-07-26, Tim Wescott wrote:
On 07/26/2010 12:50 PM, Steve B wrote:
wrote in message
...
New revenue stream for newspapers puts the squeez on bloggers.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...g-for-dollars/


Best Regards
Tom.

If a writer cannot read an article, or follow a publication, or research
an
event or subject, then rewrite it and not change enough at least to
comply
with, or have a plausible argument against alleged copyright
infringement,
they need to put down their pen because they are not a writer, but a cut
and
paster, and need to go down in a flaming trail of twenty dollar bills.
Maybe it will thin out the herd of cut and paste bloggers who couldn't
pass
a first year creative writing class.

The idealistic part of me wants to believe that.

The cynical part of me believes that the brick & mortar houses are
finding a way to cut down the competition.


Very clever idea. Let's say that I find an interesting newspaper
article and post it in thie newsgroup. If Steve Gibson finds me, he
could very conceivably shake me down for a few grand.

i

Or at least tie you up until you cry UNCLE and give him a few thou to just
go away. Lawyers are like that.

Steve

visit my blog at http://cabgbypasssurgery.com

On 2010-07-27, Steve B wrote:

"Ignoramus2966" wrote in message
Very clever idea. Let's say that I find an interesting newspaper
article and post it in thie newsgroup. If Steve Gibson finds me, he
could very conceivably shake me down for a few grand.

Or at least tie you up until you cry UNCLE and give him a few thou
to just go away. Lawyers are like that.

My point exactly.

i

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 06:01:49 -0700, "azotic"
wrote:

New revenue stream for newspapers puts the squeez on bloggers.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...g-for-dollars/


Best Regards
Tom.


Copyright the press and sue if someone gets the message. Boston Globe
sues Philly newspaper for saying in the same words 'The British are
Coming'.

Bet ole grandma is still paying grease $ to the grandson cause he
found out about her partaking in the herb.

SW

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 16:34:44 -0500, Sunworshipper
wrote:

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 06:01:49 -0700, "azotic"
wrote:

New revenue stream for newspapers puts the squeez on bloggers.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...g-for-dollars/


Best Regards
Tom.


Copyright the press and sue if someone gets the message. Boston Globe
sues Philly newspaper for saying in the same words 'The British are
Coming'.

Bet ole grandma is still paying grease $ to the grandson cause he
found out about her partaking in the herb.

SW

http://www.gilligansisle.com/images/bobust.jpg

Oh no, a link with a picture of a newspaper article.

Sue them !

Oh no, their after me Ctrl C ...

SW

"Sunworshipper" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 16:34:44 -0500, Sunworshipper
wrote:

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 06:01:49 -0700, "azotic"
wrote:

New revenue stream for newspapers puts the squeez on bloggers.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...g-for-dollars/


Best Regards
Tom.


Copyright the press and sue if someone gets the message. Boston Globe
sues Philly newspaper for saying in the same words 'The British are
Coming'.

Bet ole grandma is still paying grease $ to the grandson cause he
found out about her partaking in the herb.

SW

http://www.gilligansisle.com/images/bobust.jpg

Oh no, a link with a picture of a newspaper article.

Sue them !

Oh no, their after me Ctrl C ...

SW

Pro Se ?

Best Regards
Tom.



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 20:48:30 -0700, "azotic"
wrote:


"Sunworshipper" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 16:34:44 -0500, Sunworshipper
wrote:

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 06:01:49 -0700, "azotic"
wrote:

New revenue stream for newspapers puts the squeez on bloggers.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...g-for-dollars/


Best Regards
Tom.


Copyright the press and sue if someone gets the message. Boston Globe
sues Philly newspaper for saying in the same words 'The British are
Coming'.

Bet ole grandma is still paying grease $ to the grandson cause he
found out about her partaking in the herb.

SW

http://www.gilligansisle.com/images/bobust.jpg

Oh no, a link with a picture of a newspaper article.

Sue them !

Oh no, their after me Ctrl C ...

SW

Pro Se ?

Best Regards
Tom.



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

Who? Me? I wouldn't sue, unless they really deserved it. I think
the whole thing is silly and I'd be ashamed to extort $ with the treat
of going to court. That paper is all about $. They charge too much to
advertise, charge too much to buy it, use bait and switch tactics, and
must have to pay them to have them print a story (Sure seemed that way
to me after decades of reading it.) They have a win win win
(especially after getting rid of the Sun) situation and now they want
to extort $ through the pink tie dude, pathetic. They don't even let
you search past papers beyond something like a couple of days without
paying. No public service or gov't. watch dogging there.

Suppose my opinion is slander and I'm next. For some reason I just
feel like newspaper articles are the public domain, obviously not so
though.

SW

"Sunworshipper" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 20:48:30 -0700, "azotic"
wrote:


"Sunworshipper" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 16:34:44 -0500, Sunworshipper
wrote:

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 06:01:49 -0700, "azotic"
wrote:

New revenue stream for newspapers puts the squeez on bloggers.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...g-for-dollars/


Best Regards
Tom.


Copyright the press and sue if someone gets the message. Boston Globe
sues Philly newspaper for saying in the same words 'The British are
Coming'.

Bet ole grandma is still paying grease $ to the grandson cause he
found out about her partaking in the herb.

SW

http://www.gilligansisle.com/images/bobust.jpg

Oh no, a link with a picture of a newspaper article.

Sue them !

Oh no, their after me Ctrl C ...

SW

Pro Se ?

Best Regards
Tom.



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

Who? Me? I wouldn't sue, unless they really deserved it. I think
the whole thing is silly and I'd be ashamed to extort $ with the treat
of going to court. That paper is all about $. They charge too much to
advertise, charge too much to buy it, use bait and switch tactics, and
must have to pay them to have them print a story (Sure seemed that way
to me after decades of reading it.) They have a win win win
(especially after getting rid of the Sun) situation and now they want
to extort $ through the pink tie dude, pathetic. They don't even let
you search past papers beyond something like a couple of days without
paying. No public service or gov't. watch dogging there.

Suppose my opinion is slander and I'm next. For some reason I just
feel like newspaper articles are the public domain, obviously not so
though.

SW

As of friday they have filed 81 lawsuits in federal court. Wanna bet
they drop the ones that answer the complaint and wont settle out
of court. I wonder how long the court is gonna put up with this
shakedown scam?

Best Regards
Tom.



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 16:13:14 -0700, "azotic" wrote:


"Sunworshipper" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 20:48:30 -0700, "azotic"
wrote:


"Sunworshipper" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 16:34:44 -0500, Sunworshipper
wrote:

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 06:01:49 -0700, "azotic"
wrote:

New revenue stream for newspapers puts the squeez on bloggers.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...g-for-dollars/


Best Regards
Tom.


Copyright the press and sue if someone gets the message. Boston Globe
sues Philly newspaper for saying in the same words 'The British are
Coming'.

Bet ole grandma is still paying grease $ to the grandson cause he
found out about her partaking in the herb.

SW

http://www.gilligansisle.com/images/bobust.jpg

Oh no, a link with a picture of a newspaper article.

Sue them !

Oh no, their after me Ctrl C ...

SW

Pro Se ?

Best Regards
Tom.



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

Who? Me? I wouldn't sue, unless they really deserved it. I think
the whole thing is silly and I'd be ashamed to extort $ with the treat
of going to court. That paper is all about $. They charge too much to
advertise, charge too much to buy it, use bait and switch tactics, and
must have to pay them to have them print a story (Sure seemed that way
to me after decades of reading it.) They have a win win win
(especially after getting rid of the Sun) situation and now they want
to extort $ through the pink tie dude, pathetic. They don't even let
you search past papers beyond something like a couple of days without
paying. No public service or gov't. watch dogging there.

Suppose my opinion is slander and I'm next. For some reason I just
feel like newspaper articles are the public domain, obviously not so
though.

SW

As of friday they have filed 81 lawsuits in federal court. Wanna bet
they drop the ones that answer the complaint and wont settle out
of court. I wonder how long the court is gonna put up with this
shakedown scam?

Best Regards
Tom.



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---


If it is legal, probably schedule them.

They gave an acquaintance of mine, Irwin Schiff, basically life for
writing books. I would have loved watching that trial, but was really
busy at the time.

SW

In article , Sunworshipper wrote:

They gave an acquaintance of mine, Irwin Schiff, basically life for
writing books. I would have loved watching that trial, but was really
busy at the time.

Ummmm....no. That's not the way it happened.

Irwin Schiff was sent to jail for tax evasion -- failing to file returns in
some years, filing false returns in other years. Not "for writing books".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irwin_Schiff

On Mon, 02 Aug 2010 02:19:11 GMT, (Doug Miller)
wrote:

In article , Sunworshipper wrote:

They gave an acquaintance of mine, Irwin Schiff, basically life for
writing books. I would have loved watching that trial, but was really
busy at the time.

Ummmm....no. That's not the way it happened.

Irwin Schiff was sent to jail for tax evasion -- failing to file returns in
some years, filing false returns in other years. Not "for writing books".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irwin_Schiff


Sure enough. I had heard it was for him refusing to stop promoting his
cause. At the time I had to disassociate myself from him so I couldn't
find out the details. Still, I feel they just wanted to shut him down
cause of the others that believed, sure took their time to go after
him for tax evasion. I could have told anyone that after the times of
arguing with him while pounding beers poolside. He was animate and
would not listen to the amendment where they can levy taxes and if it
technically wasn't spelled out for mandatory vs. voluntary income that
the hammer will fall anyhow.

SW

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
...
In article , Sunworshipper
wrote:

They gave an acquaintance of mine, Irwin Schiff, basically life for
writing books. I would have loved watching that trial, but was really
busy at the time.

Ummmm....no. That's not the way it happened.

Irwin Schiff was sent to jail for tax evasion -- failing to file returns
in
some years, filing false returns in other years. Not "for writing books".

Maybe he means Schiff was keeping *two sets* of books. g


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irwin_Schiff