Buy amoxicillin antibiotic, First, A Time to Dance raised the question, and Danciti added some valid points to the discussion. Since I 
wanted to be sure to link to everyone who has chimed in, amoxicillin warnings, Amoxicillin tablets, I'm going to continue the conversation here.
Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, amoxicillin cystitis, Amoxicillin anxiety, so yada yada yada this isn't legal advice.
Also, otc amoxicillin, Amoxicillin for urinary tract infection, for the sake of having this upfront: here is the US Copyright Office's page on Fair Use.
Danciti raised a very good example of what would entail infringment using DTW's complete reposting of New York Times reviews on its site. If we, or Danciti, amoxicillin 500, Amoxicillin contraceptive pill, or A Time to Dance had reposted in that way, it would be black and white infringement, amoxicillin cost without insurance, Birth control amoxicillin, and we'd expect a phone call from whatever stripmall law firm fits within the Times' budget these days.
In this specific case, however, amoxicillin tr-k clv, Amoxicillin half life, there's a catch: the articles being reposted are New York Times articles about performances happening at Dance Theater Workshop. Therefore, amoxicillin antibiotic shelf life, Amoxicillin capsules, even though the entire article is being appropriated, it would be highly debatable as to whether or not DTW's use is infringement, amoxicillin 250mg 5ml. Bladder infection amoxicillin, It's no different than if they photocopied and blew up a copy of that article, and placed it in their window or on a sign board, amoxicillin clav tab 875mg, Amoxicillin bronchitis, or when a restaurant reprints a review and posts it on their door.
That being said, uses of amoxicillin, Sinusitis amoxicillin, Danciti is 100% right in using this type of link as an example of better form. There so few critics left in the employ of major newspapers that we need to circle the wagons, and maximize the potential revenue that they bring into their papers.
Similar posts: Buy cephalexin without prescription. Amoxicillin 500 mg. Augmentin 875 mg. Augmentin 625. Augmentin online. Ampicillin mode of action.
Trackbacks from: Buy amoxicillin antibiotic. Buy amoxicillin antibiotic. Buy amoxicillin antibiotic. Buy amoxicillin antibiotic. Buy amoxicillin antibiotic. Buy amoxicillin antibiotic.
Tagged with: a time to dance , content scraping , dance reviews , dance theater workshop , danciti , fair use , infringement , new york times
Yes, I see your point, that DTW probably has some right to repost reviews about their own performances. I think that we’re probably in a grey area here. The Times could made a good case that reposting the entire review devalues their original content since they lose out on that traffic and advertising revenue.
In the end though, I think it’s just rude to completely repost even with attribution. It’s also probably more effective for an artist to quote a meaningful excerpt and provide a link to the full review rather than expect the reader to sift through the entire thing without guidance.
It’s a very interesting conversation…
You write, “It’s no different than if they photocopied and blew up a copy of that article, and placed it in their window or on a sign board, or when a restaurant reprints a review and posts it on their door.”
I think it is different, though. The whole thing is that infringement means interfering with “the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.” If DTW or another studio/artist/company blew up or made copies of the article to hang up, they aren’t exactly directing people away from the original source of the article. Whereas DTW’s blog comes up on Google so people could potentially find some article on their blog before the new source (which has the advertising).
For example, the recent post “Dancing Bear” on DTW’s blog duplicates an article by Susan Reiter for The NY Press (http://www.dancetheaterworkshop.org/blog/2009/03/20/dancing-bear/#more-1229). If you google the article (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en-us&q=susan+reiter+dancing+bear&btnG=Search) DTW comes up BEFORE NY Press. Readers visit DTW and NY Press loses out on viewers/potential advertising.
The nuance of copyright law. Welcome to hell.
In this case, if the NYTimes were ever to come after DTW, I think DTW would win. Infringement cases tend to be fairly heavy on context, and rights do require maintenance. DTW (as well as other arts organizations) has a long history of excerpting full reviews on their website, and the Times, directly or indirectly, is aware of that fact. Therefore, the fact that they haven’t sued or complained, prevents them from winning a suit.
To bring in Taylor’s comment - the example she raises about google placement is one that has to be headed for the courts, if it isn’t already (see the IHT article linked to in A Time to Dance’s original post on the subject). The most important thing to acknowledge is that the law (sometimes quickly, often times slowly), evolves. DTW’s use may be supported by the courts today, but might not be a year from now.
More context: we’re talking about print media, where the case law is very evolved. What if we were talking about choreography, where the case law can fit on a single hand?