legal paranoia (was Re: [WikiEN-l] Encarta article list)

[DF]

Case law has consistently held that an index of a work
may be independently subject to copyright.  We are
certainly not using an insubstantial portion of their
index.

I've discussed this here and other places before, but
I do not believe we have a defensible fair use claim
in this case.  Since I have always been on the losing
side of those arguments, I am just surprised something
changed.

-DF

> And it seems to me, as we've discussed on here 
> before, that it would easily fall under the "fair 
> use" clause. We are using an insubstantial part of 
> their encyclopedia; we are using it for our own 
> internal purposes (it is in the Wikipedia 
> namespace, is it not?); we are non-profit; we are 
> not claiming copyright; we are not defrauding them >
in any way; we are not even looking at the content >
itself, just bibliographic information.
> 
> FF