Quote:
Originally Posted by vicz
What I was trying to illustrate was my opinion that it is impractical to deny consent to read something which is being made generally available. For example, if someone opens your mail and reads a letter, that is clearly interception without consent. But if you send a postcard and postie reads the message - well it would be hard to argue no consent.
|
Just because content is provided to someone else free, does not imply that you have an unconditional right to access it, or that the owner of that content has given you consent to use that content for any and all purposes... including commercial gain without due royalty payments.
That is what copyright is all about. You'll find most sites make that explicit in the copyright/terms of use ('private and personal non-commercial use only' ).
Try taking articles from the Daily Mail, and use them to promote the Guardian. Without paying the Daily Mail. Then see what happens. It won't be pretty.
Organisations which exist to protect copyright holders include;
Society of Authors
http://www.societyofauthors.org/
Performing Rights Society
http://www.mcps-prs-alliance.co.uk/
F.A.C.T.
http://www.fact-uk.org.uk/
I think we need to make them aware.
Pete.