We still have a long way to go...

In fighting ignorance I mean.

The following is from Reuters. (I can’t find it anywhere on the net.)

Moderator’s Notes: This is copyrighted material. From the Reuter’s website:

Do not post copyrighted work on the SDMB. The registration agreement is very explicit on this subject. As a publisher, you can imagine the Chicago Reader (owner of this message board), is a very strong advocate of copyright laws. Small portions of an article are okay. Links are great. In fact, here’s one to the article I’ve removed (wasn’t too hard to find either, only took me about 3 minutes):

[Edited by UncleBeer on 11-15-2001 at 11:17 AM]

I just needed to express how hard I laughed at that.

Oh, yes. I particularly enjoyed Franklin Eleanor Roosevelt and the Gazpacho. (Oh, and the Canadian Missile Crisis.)

We’re doomed.

Funny as all get out, though, and I wish I’d heard Dr Martin Luther King’s “I Had a Hammer” speech. I bet it was even better than the one about the dream.

They were probably all high when they wrote that stuff.

My real question is to the OP…If that article isn’t on the net, did you painstakingly transcribe it?

Plato? Aristotle? Socrates? Morons!
~Are you lucid? Drug induced? Through blood shot eyes you see the city come alive… -Better Than Ezra

And if you DID transcribe it, why did you add this bit?

Just wondering.

I’m mostly interested in all the theocrats Martin Luther nailed up to the church door . . .

Oh. Well then. Never mind…

I was wondering if a Mod was going to do something. :slight_smile:

No, I work in a bank, and we have the Reuters infromation service, so I just Cut & Pasted.

I thought it was worth sharing, but not that much. :slight_smile:

If you mean because of copyright, I think it should be alright. We pay for the service and are allowed to distibute the info as long as it is credited.

It’s worthless…

Nothing on the Age of Entitlement or the Renais Sauce.

Uncle Beer, I just realised that you edited my OP. That’s cool, it’s your job.

I just want to set your mind at ease though.

We (my company) do have permission from Reuters to redistribute their material on the net as long as we credit them. It’s part of the service we provide.

I wouldn’t intentionally do anything that I thought would get you, me or The Reader in trouble.

And I do know about the Reuters Web site. The article wasn’t there when I posted. I checked.

As I said, I just wanted to set you mind at rest. I don’t want to cause any problems. :slight_smile:

That’s cool. I appreciate the assurances, but I’m more comfortable with it this way. If you want to post Reuter’s stories in the future, I (and the CR legal staff) would prefer links instead of full documents. Just a consistency and clarity thing. Plus, I won’t get a dozen e-mails telling of someone violating our copyright clause.