We know how hard it is to get worked up about copyright. All those funny ©’s and time frames and what is fair use, anyway? So it’s always nice to have a copyright primer handy. Plus they make great party favors!
Bloggers and copyright mavens alike can always use a refresher on truths and myths. One we see quite often is full reproduction of an article from another source. These are generally attributed, but posted with the clear intent of keeping you, the reader, from going to the source. That, for what it’s worth, is bad. To quote Brad Thompson:
Intent, and damage to the commercial value of the work are important considerations. Are you reproducing an article from the New York Times because you needed to in order to criticise the quality of the New York Times, or because you couldn’t find time to write your own story, or didn’t want your readers to have to register at the New York Times web site? The first is probably fair use, the others probably aren’t.
(via MediaBistro Toolbox)
