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