Michael Turley wrote:
Their choice of what articles to include is a very significant part of their content.
How do you measure "significant"? If their articles average 1,000 words each we're talking about less than 1/10 of 1 percent.
The full list is a unique expression of editorial choice of what parts of human knowledge to include, and as such is protected by copyright law. Our list is an edited copy of theirs. Our use of significant portions of their copyright work in order to create and improve direct competition for them, the copyright holders, is certainly not protected under fair use.
I realize that the corporatist agenda is often a matter of talking in favour of competition while acting against it. Restricting competition is not one of the purposes of copyright law. If that were the case I could see Coke starting a legal action every time that Pepsi referred to them in one of their ads.
I wouldn't want us to be in breech of anti-trust legislation. :-)
I don't think I can make it any simpler than that.
Simple and simplistic are two different concepts.
In the end, it's up to a judge somewhere. The judge may not agree, but in this world of capitalist corporatism, I'd be willing to wager a lot of money that you're wrong.
How much? Who will hold the bets? How will it be settled without without the need to go to court?
Ec