Citing Professional Sources in Posts
- Thread starter knapplc
- Start date
zoogs
New member
Is there a modern browser that doesn't have tabs?
Guys, this is basic stuff. Hopefully you didn't struggle with those 9th grade english classes. Someone else's words - cite it. If you'd like to get into a discussion on how copyright law is unjust, feel free, but it will likely be a losing argument, and "I don't want to be bothered with it, can't you ignore it?" isn't a very compelling argument
sd'sker
Banned
yeah, but chrome's are the best.Is there a modern browser that doesn't have tabs?
Guys, this is basic stuff. Hopefully you didn't struggle with those 9th grade english classes. Someone else's words - cite it. If you'd like to get into a discussion on how copyright law is unjust, feel free, but it will likely be a losing argument, and "I don't want to be bothered with it, can't you ignore it?" isn't a very compelling argument
NUance
New member
Back on point re copyrighted material posted on message boards: The following is an answer to some mod on a different message board asking about posts with copyrighted material:
The gist is, if you are creating a thread about an article only copy a small portion of the article. Say, 20% or less. If you copy over 50% it's probably not Fair Use.
On the other hand, even if everyone on HB plays by the rules and stays within the bound of Fair Use, the asshats at the OWH and LJS are still going to occasionally send nasty letters. But the mere fact that they claim to have intellectual property rights to something doesn't necessarily mean it's so.
Here are some Guidelines for Fair Use: LINK
The gist is, if you are creating a thread about an article only copy a small portion of the article. Say, 20% or less. If you copy over 50% it's probably not Fair Use.
On the other hand, even if everyone on HB plays by the rules and stays within the bound of Fair Use, the asshats at the OWH and LJS are still going to occasionally send nasty letters. But the mere fact that they claim to have intellectual property rights to something doesn't necessarily mean it's so.
Last edited by a moderator:
Excel
New member
I'm a little late to the party on this one but I'll say my piece.
1. To people complaining about the time it takes to leave HB and read an article or the inconvenience of having to summarize and carefully quote one when posting,
a. Get over it, its not that big of a pain to click a link.
b. Yes, it would be easier to copy and paste an article's text but it isn't easier to read. Many journalists seem to think that word count alone will transform them into the next Hemingway so they bury a few interesting facts behind paragraphs of meaningless junk. I don't want to read that. If you pluck out the meaningful bits and provide some commentary your reader will appreciate it.
2. To NUance, I completely agree with you in that the OWH and LJS may not have all the intellectual property rights they claim but its important for HB and its posters to play ball because the only way we really learn the extent of their rights is through legal action. I doubt that the shadowy anonymous owner of HB wants to be disturbed from his smoke filled backroom poker game to deal with that. As newspapers transition to online pay-to-view models they could look to assert themselves in court using instances just like these, they could even bypass the forum owners and go straight for the users posting their content. The chances are pretty slim that they'd do any of that but the costs would be tremendous...I mean I certainly don't have the time or resources for it even if I won.
Last edited by a moderator: