[X4U] OT: Question on cross posting and copyright infringement

[dz at caribe.net]

<!SNIP!>
> Ah, dZ, but you fail to see the differences in what is being discussed. You
> assumed I'm talking about something I'm not. The OP didn't ask whether he
> could include an excerpt of a post in another post! In fact, he asked about
> "cross posting"; as I said, it is of course fine to post your own words to
> more than one list at a time, the definition of "cross posting".

I do not fail to see the "differences in what is being discussed".  There is no difference.  Fair Use does includes excerpting, but not exclusively so.  Again, it must be addressed on a case-by-case basis, and traditionally it has.

> Instead of arguing with ME and my answer, how about answering the original
> poster's question? :)

Because my qualms are not with his question, but with the distorted answers being offered by those who, admittedly in good faith and perhaps naively, assume certain positions because that's how they have always heard it.  After all, as they say, one billion chinese can't be wrong, right?

> I work in publishing, and I'm well familiar with obtaining permissions for
> inclusion in another work, when it's necessary, and when it's not. There's a
> difference between fair use quoting or referencing a study, a poem, a
> paragraph from a work, etc., and including the whole work.

I'm sorry, but that does not make you a legal expert, nor experienced in Copyright Law or Intellectual Property rights.  You work in an industry where "playing it safe" is the key to survival, where you *must* ask permission -- unwarranted or not -- just because the risk of not doing so is just too big.

And frankly, your liberal use of the term "stealing" when referring to "copyright infringement", makes me question your reliance on the media, the RIAA, the MPAA, or the DMCA as your source of legal advice.

Now, I'm not claiming to be an expert; I am not.  Neither am I going around telling people how things "are", casting wholesale aspersions on certain acts or points of views, just because that's how I think things are, or how I always heard them to be.  I have known many people in publishing, electronic and otherwise, and most (perhaps all?) mechanically follow this trend; and the understanding is not that it is illegal, unethical, or infringing, but because they *assume* it to be.  And of course, the first "Cease and Desist" letter they receive is enough to make them toe the line -- but how many of them actually went to court to argue their case, and lost?

And my advice to the original poster, as my advice in other such posts, is:  Ask a lawyer, if you really are concerned about following the letter of the law.  Or save your money and use your own judgement.  Or if you are the adventurous kind, assess your risk and your values:  what are the chances of someone coming after you, and how committed and willing are you to follow through with legal action?  But over all, and most importantly, do not ask these kind of questions on forums such as this one.  You will never get good reliable advice, and when you do, how will you tell it apart from the bunk?

    -dZ.