# Posting a Q from another site

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/posting-a-q-from-another-site/139131>\
**Category:** About This Message Board\
**Created:** [November 27, 2002, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/posting-a-q-from-another-site/139131 "2002-11-27T16:42:24Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\
**Post date:** [November 27, 2002, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/posting-a-q-from-another-site/139131/1 "2002-11-27T16:42:24Z")

</div>

I came across [This Question](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/2518181.stm) over on the Talking Points section of the BBC News site. Virtually all of the responses read as if they belonged in IMHO. The topic, though, is ripe for GD.

Knowing the caliber of folks we have here, I thought it would be very interesting to read their thoughts and watch the debate unfold. Is this OK, or would it violate some type of copyright/ Reader’s Standards rule? Credit-wise I would, of course, link to the original site, give a slight bit of background and perhaps quote a small section.

I thought it best to ask here before I blundered into GD.

Thanks!

Rhythmdvl

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Coldfire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@Coldfire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Coldfire)\
**Post date:** [November 27, 2002, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/posting-a-q-from-another-site/139131/2 "2002-11-27T22:16:40Z")

</div>

You want to debate the issue here, in GD?

Sure, why not. Just refer to the BBC site with a link, phrase the OP in your own words, and off you go.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\
**Post date:** [November 27, 2002, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/posting-a-q-from-another-site/139131/3 "2002-11-27T22:17:49Z")

</div>

I don’t see any problem with it. It’s all over GoogleNews just now, via the Reuters wire, so the Beeb can hardly claim they have some kind of copyright on the subject.

The original BBC article.  
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2516181.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2516181.stm)

> [@](#):
>
> Wednesday, 27 November, 2002, 13:39 GMT  
> Face transplants ‘on the horizon’
> 
> A leading plastic surgeon is calling for a debate about whether face transplants should take place.  
> Peter Butler said surgical techniques would allow the procedure to take place within the next six to nine months.

[http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/reuters20021127\_170.html](http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/reuters20021127_170.html)  
[http://www.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/11/27/face.transplant.reut](http://www.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/11/27/face.transplant.reut)

> [@](#):
>
> Face transplants no longer science fiction  
> Wednesday, November 27, 2002 Posted: 2:59 PM EST (1959 GMT)
> 
> LONDON, England (Reuters) – Full face transplants are no longer science fiction fantasy, a leading surgeon said Wednesday. They are technically feasible but ethically complex.
> 
> Peter Butler from London’s Royal Free Hospital called for a debate on the ethics of such an operation made possible by new drugs that stop the body’s immune system rejecting a transplanted face.