On 12 August 2011 17:19, Steve Summit scs@eskimo.com wrote:
Ken Arromdee wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2011, David Gerard wrote:
This is false. Print sources do not require a legal scan to be available.
If you try using an illegal scan of a print source, you'll be told that you have no reason to believe the copy accurately represents the source.
I think David meant there's no rule that says there must be a scan (legal or illegal) at all. I think your point is that there's some precedent for rejecting (or at least complaining about) sources that are only available off-line.
Rather than your interpretation, I'd like to see examples of what Ken's complaining about - whether he was told "you can't use that print reference" or whether he was told "you've linked to a scan that's a copyright violation". They're rather different things.
-d.