Subject: Re: MNS and Justice Dept. From: Pd4wrds@aol.com Date: Sat, 10 Jun 1995 17:07:44 -0400

Sender: owner-online-news@marketplace.com
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO
X-Status: 

In regard to posting articles from online news services:

Is it a "clear and blantant" violation of copyright law?

No it's not.

First, the person who re-posted the story received no compensation to do so.
 
Second, the posting is not likely to cost the NYTimes any future sales. 
Third, the posting was done, it could be argued, for educational  purposes,
which is allowed under copyright law.
Fourth, due credit was given to the author and the publisher.

So, the reason it is not "clear and blatant" is there are possible arguments
against it being a copyright violation.

To label it "clear and blatant" is a potentially libelous statement.

Howard Owens
(My opinions are those of my employer)


From owner-online-news@marketplace.com Sat Jun 10 22:05:23 1995
Received: from marketplace.com (majordom@marketplace.com [199.45.128.10]) by cnj.digex.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA27761 ; for ; Sat, 10 Jun 1995 22:05:21 -0400
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by marketplace.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id SAA27424 for online-news-outgoing; Sat, 10 Jun 1995 18:32:05 -0600
Received: from covina.lightside.com (covina.lightside.com [198.81.209.1]) by marketplace.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA27419 for ; Sat, 10 Jun 1995 18:32:02 -0600
Received: from [198.81.209.43] by covina.lightside.com with smtp
	(Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0sKaye-0009ZXC; Sat, 10 Jun 95 17:34 PDT
X-Sender: loundy@covina.lightside.com
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: James Cook