Re: posting copyrighted work--as a teacher of literature, much of which is under copyright, I keep a pretty close watch on current copyright provisions. Without formal permission, you can quote short (a relative term, generally not more than 250 words but never more than a minority of the total work) selections in the course of discussing a relevant topic yourself in a work you distribute. You can also make one copy for your personal use of an entire copyrighted work, but you cannot distribute it to anyone else, and the extent of sharing the physical copy itself is also restricted in various ways.
On the whole, I would recommend simply giving a brief summary of the article, and listing the appropriate URL and the conditions for registering (still free on Barron's, I think); otherwise, people can buy their own copy or consult one in a library.
Mark, I doubt you'll be sued, since you obviously have no commercial interest in posting a copy, but I've seen people receive nasty letters from publishers asserting that they would sue if the person continued to copy in the future, since distributing copies deprives the publisher and author of potential revenue. They might also sue SI for permitting it to be posted (they have successfully sued Kinko's for "allowing" copyrighted work to be illegally copied on their machines), which really could create a mess--no one wants the heavy hand of censorship coming into these posts. At law, when they become aware of a violation, authors and publishers have to defend their property rights, even in small cases like this one, or they weaken their hand in defending major cases of piracy.
I might add that GRNO stockholders have a serious interest in maintaining these property rights, as well--we don't want anybody publishing or reproducing in any way the proprietary software code that controls the processor.
=+=+=Norm |
