Posting of Full Articles

[B24]

We need to refrain from copying and pasting full articles from other websites on Bengalszone Forums unless you have permission from the copyright holder.

If you are going to post about an article, post at most a paragraph from the article and a link back to the full article. Make sure you always link back to the full article.

There have been many websites getting sued lately by a company named Righthaven. So far they are only sueing for articles from the Las Vegas Journal Review, but you never know when they are going to expand. That said, never post even a paragraph from any article published by the Las Vegas Review Journal. Don't even link to them.

Posts will be deleted that don't follow the rules.

Here are some articles about Righthaven sueing websites.

http://www.techdirt....dition=techdirt

[BengalszoneBilly]

Whoa. Glad I read this post for I'm probably the biggest offender about posting full articles here. As far as the Las Vegas Journal Review, don't worry. I never read that rag, even when I lived there!

[ArmyBengal]

Yeah, I always pull blurbs from PFT and the official site.

Granted, I ALWAYS post links back to the main site, but I will curtail from here on.

[bengals2010]

We need to refrain from copying and pasting full articles from other websites on Bengalszone Forums unless you have permission from the copyright holder.

If you are going to post about an article, post at most a paragraph from the article and a link back to the full article. Make sure you always link back to the full article.

There have been many websites getting sued lately by a company named Righthaven. So far they are only sueing for articles from the Las Vegas Journal Review, but you never know when they are going to expand. That said, never post even a paragraph from any article published by the Las Vegas Journal Review. Don't even link to them.

Posts will be deleted that don't follow the rules.

Here are some articles about Righthaven sueing websites.

http://www.techdirt....dition=techdirt

Fortunately, I have not post a article here

[membengal]

You have shown outstanding restraint, bengals2010. What with all of 72 hours on the site to your resume.

[ArmyBengal]

Hey, he's trying to build his post count...

[Larry]

.

[HoosierCat]

Looks like Righthaven's act is finally wearing thin...

The wheels appear to be coming off the Righthaven trainwreck-in-progress. The litigation outfit, which generally sues small-time bloggers, forum operators, and the occasional Ars Technica writer, has just been slapped with a $34,000 bill for legal fees.

Righthaven v. Hoehn, filed in Nevada federal court, has been an utterly shambolic piece of litigation. Righthaven sued one Wayne Hoehn, a longtime forum poster on the site Madjack Sports. Buried in Home>>Forums>>Other Stuff>>Politics and Religion, Hoehn made a post under the username "Dogs That Bark" in which he pasted in two op-ed pieces. One came from the Las Vegas Review-Journal, which helped set up the Righthaven operation. Righthaven sued.

This was the salvation of the news business? Targeting forum posters in political subforums of sports handicapping sites? But at least it looked like Righthaven had a point; copying had certainly occurred. Had infringement?

Before it was all over, the judge decided that Righthaven had no standing even to bring the case, since only a copyright holder can file an infringement suit (Righthaven's contract only gave it a bare right to sue… which is no right at all). Then the irritated judge decided that Hoehn's cut-and-paste job was fair use, helping establish a precedent that could undercut the entire Righthaven approach.

/>http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/08/righthaven-rocked-owes-34000-after-fair-use-loss.ars

[Kazkal]

Omg bullet dodged