Home Critic's Corner

Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

RE: Indeed. And yet ...

>Again, I remind you, of fair use:
>#Uses That Are Generally Fair Uses#
#Criticism and comment -- for example, quoting or excerpting a work in a
>review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment#

Please note that under US copyright law, Fair Use is not a right but a
defense in a potential suit over infringement. Whether that defense would
be successful depends on how much of the original copyrighted work has
been quoted. If someone quotes 30 words of a 3000-word article, a Fair Use
defense would certainly succeed. If someone quotes all 3000 words, a Fair
Use defense would certainly fail. The question of where the dividing line
lies tends to be decided on a case-by-case basis, but generally favoring
the copyright owner, as far as I am aware.

In your case, while you didn't republish the entire work, you did quote
a relatively large proportion of the work, without either permission,
attribution, or a link to the original.

>The only thing I forgot to do was provide a link. Which I then did at
>your request.

And the attribution, which you also "forgot." It would have cost you
nothing either to ask for permission (which I would have given) or to
add attribution and link, yet you did neither.

>No, you were looking to get the thread deep sixed with name calling. You
>have done this numerous times before.

Really? Could you provide links to the "numerous" examples, please, Dick.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile


This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Analog Engineering Associates  


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups


You can not post to an archived thread.