Is a NEWS CLIPPING service VIOLATING COPYRIGHT?
466350
No. A newspaper does not have a copyright to the facts they publish.\nThe controlling case is the Supreme Court case: International News service v Associated Press(248 US 215).\nIt held that one news service reprinting the stories of the other news service --is not violate copyright.\nThey were punished nevertheless because they deprived the other agency of profits.\nSo a News Clipping service does not violate copyright -- but it can Potentially be punished if it deprives newspapers of profit.
918624
No.\n\nYou would be violating both the rights of the content creators (the people who make the shows) and the licensors of the content (the station).
319960
This is an impossible question to answer. The "paper clip" would be part of some user interface, on a site or in an e-mail client. Without knowing what you're using (such as a particular web site or e-mail client), there is no way of answering this question.
49928
If the lyrics have a current copyright (which is likely for anything less than a hundred years old), and you don't have the permission of the copyright holder, you are in violation of copyright law.\n\nHere is a link to FAQ's from the US Copyright Office:
604678
It is possibly and probably illegal, although it depends on what you're taking. Regardless of whether or not there's a copyright notice, the text of the website is copyright of the author of the text or owner of the site. There is a fair use exception to copyright; again, that gets into the amount and substantiality of what you're taking. Giving credit to the original author doesn't matter if you're infringing; it's still infringement.\n\nHere's a link about the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, which explains more about some of the issues involved: \nhttp://www.keytlaw.com/Copyrights/dmca.htm
496656
All works on wikipedia are distributed under GNU Free Documentation License.[1]\nThis means that it is OK to copy ANYTHING from wikipedia if it the derived work will be distributed under similarly free license.\nThis is known as "copy left"\nSince Yahoo is not claiming copyright to any of the answers [2] it is not a violation of any laws, if the answerer agrees to license his answer under GFDL as well.\nSo Wikipedia is fine, however copying from other websites might be a copyright infringement.
900902
There aren't really any laws on the internet.  Even if it is copyrighted content, the person streaming the media is the one at fault, not the person watching it.\n\nYou're fine.
718596
No, but one work around is using a program like Paint Shop Pro which has a "screen capture" feature thus avoiding the copyright issue.
467243
Yes. They are original works of authorship fixed in a tangible medium, which is all that's required for a copyright.\n\nThis would not necessarily keep you from using the factual information in the press release in something that you were writing, though. The facts themselves can't be copyrighted, but you can't copy the press release and call it your own.
878291
Yes if the files you are copying are copyrighted and you do not have the right to copy them.
583574
Yes.\n\nhttp://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/
945553
No, it isn't legal to post any copywrited videos of any kind, but like everything else on the internet, the status of legal or illegal really doesn't matter.
362757
No. You are creating a backup copy in case the hard copy is damaged. *wink, wink* Seriously though, as long as you're not making it publicly available I don't think that would be considered copyright infringement.
19218
Its possible if the content was made by you and you give permission to share it, or what you are sharing is free in the first place, for example linux programs :)
10282
DUDE!Dont u know that downloading copyrighted stuff is a crime? But then, i guess a crime is a crime ONLY if you GET CAUGHT. So try out phazeDDL.com\nor use a software called Bittorrent.here are the links
708262
Yes you can do that if it is not copyright protected.\nE
1046413
The law is contradictory on the point.  On the one hand, fair use legislation allows it.  On the other hand, the DMCA legislation prohibits defeating copy protection.  The courts have been leaning in favor of the movie studios, but the issue is not fully settled.