Mike Duvos writes:
[Brad Templeton:]
I, and many other people initially had the intuitive feeling that it could never be a violation of copyright to make a link to a web page. Of late, I've come to think that this might be wrong.
Now what CPAC objects to is people who post messages saying, essentially,
"Look at the silly CPAC people rant and froth. <Click Here>"
I would suggest that CPAC is a political organization, with a very well-defined social agenda, which I have every right to comment on, and that illustrative hyperlinks in my commentary constitute "Fair Use" of their content.
Am I on firm legal ground here?
If you merely point to someone else's content, I don't see how you can possibly be found to have violated their copyright. The "linkee" site is the one publishing the information guarded by copyright, not the "linker" ("publish" == to desseminate or make available to the public). IMO, you don't even need to cite "fair use" for this; *you're* not publishing it, they are. This is just an intimidation tactic. (Of course, if they have lawyers and money and motivation, and you don't, it may very well work.) BTW, do you have an URL to the Brad Templeton piece? -- Jeff (IANAL, etc.)