Podium Charter Revision: Don't post entire articles or large blocks of text

Quote from Elmer : This will actually make it easier to see what point the OP is trying to make, though obviously, some will post out of context quotes.

Unfortunately... I think that will be a major problem. I think it's better to click on the link and read the entire article and come back here to see what's highlighted.

Quote from redmaxx : I didn't think fair use protected copying an entire work, did it?

Quote from riptide_slick : It's one of those subjects that's rather elusive to black and white answers like "yes" but in spirit, yes (IMHO) it could, as long as it could pass the other tests (nature of copyrighted work, nature of use, and potential for impact on market for source.)

Actually, this one's pretty black and white.

Yes, fair use can protect copying the entire work.

In other words, posting the entire article does not automatically preclude fair use protection, so long as all the other factors are met.

Wouldn't DMCA protect Slickdeals from being sued?

• It's user that's posting copyrighted content
• It up to news media to serve take-down notice
• Slickdeals response would be take-down the article

As if the absurdities of copyright law weren't already highlighted enough...

Its always a good business plan to not learn from others' failures and instead just keep bashing your head into it until it works.

Quote from trancepire : I'm not holding my breath though; I suspect the end result will instead be the pasting of a couple snippets, a link, and some hyperbolic BS in place of the current full-article paste, link, and hyperbolic BS.

I'm of the same opinion.
(DISCLAIMER: This is just my opinion which is based on pure self-fabricated falsehoods and fantasies.)

I cannot express my displeasure with Mr. Slickdeals forcefully enough, whom I ASSume is responsible for this travesty of civil rights violation.
The Podium is the electronic Age equivalent of the Public Square - it is a PUBLIC meeting space which ANYONE can enter to discuss issues of the day.

NO court would uphold the prohibition of reading someone's article aloud as a prelude to PUBLIC discussion of the concepts espoused within the article.
Good luck even getting a court to hear such a frivolous lawsuit.

Censorship run amok.

Slickdeals, I call upon you to uphold the 1st amendment.
Give this lecherous blackmailing scumbag a toehold and even the descriptions used to post a Hot Deal will eventually become subject to litigation.
Grow a pair Mr. Slickdeals, or risk slaughter of the golden goose itself.
Picture yourself suddenly receiving a notice of action for THOUSANDS of copyright infringements made here by people who've cut & pasted the product descriptions directly from the product vendor's site.
You think the cost of fighting a small action over a copyrighted article on the Podium is financially unwise, try defending your self in THOUSANDS of such actions concurrently, from hundreds of vendors - egged on by this "enterprising" asshat.
He'll look at this site and see the golden goose laying in HIS yard. .

Besides, with all the money you have made, (not exactly shikken feed no matter how much you may protest about fiscal impoverishment), and will continue to make, it's in your own vested self-interest to protect what you have built.

Plus, the wealthy have a duty and obligation to uphold the very essence of the system which made them wealthy.
The Podium is a hard draw for slickdeals and DOES contribute to your overall earnings, but aside from that, you KNOW - in your heart - that defending the PUBLIC SQUARE is the "right thing to do".

You will be a hero, no matter how unsung, for doing so.
You'll sleep better at night for knowing you did something to build a better society.

I hate frivolous lawsuits, but I think it is fair to respect the rights of copyright holders. If I run a newspaper business, and I pay a staff of writers and researchers in far-flung cities, and my only compensation is my website advertising revenue... Well? Yes, I'd feel that people who snatched my whole stories stole from me. Conversely, someone who quotes a paragraph or two, with a link back to my site is helping me.

I definitely don't want Slickdeals to get sued. But we also have to respect the rights of others, or else we'll soon have no rights of our own. America cannot function as a democracy without a free press, and we cannot have a free press if we rob their revenue opportunities at every turn.

But I hope the scumbag lawyer who's buying up publishing rights of twenty year-old stories loses money on the deal.

Quote from appleyum : Wouldn't DMCA protect Slickdeals from being sued? It's user that's posting copyrighted content It up to news media to serve take-down notice Slickdeals response would be take-down the article

That's not certain. The rationale behind requiring a notice is that the website (or ISP) wouldn't know that the infringement was taking place and it would be impractical to police. That's why we're changing our policy to one that definitely doesn't promote something that could be characterized as copyright infringement.

*** If you post more than 3 or 4 paragraphs of an article then your thread is going to get spammed. So when your thread magically disappears that should be the first thought that crosses your mind. Unless you are a troll, then you just need to think about how much of a troll you are instead. ***

Quote from Doctor_Wu : *** If you post more than 3 or 4 paragraphs of an article then your thread is going to get spammed. So when your thread magically disappears that should be the first thought that crosses your mind. Unless you are a troll, then you just need to think about how much of a troll you are instead. ***

Just out of curiousity, do these rules apply to articles that are either not copy written or are from blogs that encourage people to post the articles elsewhere as long as they are cited and properly linked?

In related news: Read This News Site And They Will Hunt You Down And Sue You [consumerist.com]

Quote : The North Country Gazette, an online-only publication based in Chestertown, NY, wants you to know that reading their site without a subscription is serious business. How serious? Well, if you read more than one page on the site without a subscription, the site owner claims that she will use your IP address to track you down and sue you.

Quote from redmaxx : In related news: Read This News Site And They Will Hunt You Down And Sue You [consumerist.com]

Someone needs a large dose of anon.

Quote from riptide_slick : Someone needs a large dose of anon.

No one should be subjected to large doses of Anon as it would violate the Constitutional protection against cruel and unusual punishment.

Hell, even small doses of Anon are questionable.

Quote from Demosthenes9 : No one should be subjected to large doses of Anon as it would violate the Constitutional protection against cruel and unusual punishment. Hell, even small doses of Anon are questionable.

Hell, just get the 'mouse (and yes, I know the anon referred to earlier is a different one and legion) to start writing angry letters to the editor. In that toxic green text of his that is a bitch to read.