Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Canada News Your Rights Online

Canadian Newspaper Charging $150 License Fee To Publish Excerpts 217

dakohli writes "Michael Geist has pointed out an interesting development at the National Post's website. 'If you try to highlight the text to cut and paste it, you are presented with a pop-up request to purchase a license if you plan to post the article to a website, intranet or a blog. The fee would be $150.' He notes that even if you are highlighting a 3rd party quote inside an article a pop-up asking if you want a license will appear. Mr Geist points out this might be contrary to Canadian Copyright Law's fair use provisions."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Canadian Newspaper Charging $150 License Fee To Publish Excerpts

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 07, 2013 @08:24PM (#43111423)
    Just block scripts from . They advertise some "fancy" features content publishers:

    Your iCopyright plugin [for Wordpress] is automatically configured with a default set of business rules that grant users permission to use a limited amount of your content for free, and to license the rights to use your content for a fee. You can modify these services and prices by logging into the iCopyright Conductor console and changing the settings for your publication. From within Conductor you can also use the Discovery infringement detection service, execute syndication agreements, and run reports on licensing activity and revenue.

  • Not only that... (Score:5, Informative)

    by betterunixthanunix ( 980855 ) on Thursday March 07, 2013 @08:26PM (#43111451)
    Not only did NoScript completely defeat this system, but it actually revealed which company they hired to create it: []
  • Simple solution (Score:5, Informative)

    by margeman2k3 ( 1933034 ) on Thursday March 07, 2013 @08:31PM (#43111505)
    I clicked 'Quit asking me', and then it let me copy it anyways.
    Sometimes there are simpler solutions than disabling javascript or copying it from the HTML.
  • Re:What if... (Score:5, Informative)

    by pesho ( 843750 ) on Thursday March 07, 2013 @08:53PM (#43111691)
    Or you can add "" to your adblock filter list and never see the stupid overlay ever again.
  • by chromas ( 1085949 ) on Thursday March 07, 2013 @09:01PM (#43111773)
    Uncheck your browser's equivalent of "Allow scripts to detect context menu events", which has almost no legitimate use outside of Web Apps®.
  • Re:What if... (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 07, 2013 @09:46PM (#43112115)

    Just disable javascript. This is the same crap like those 90s "no right click" scripts.

  • by compro01 ( 777531 ) on Thursday March 07, 2013 @10:11PM (#43112275)

    Black has nothing to do with this newspaper anymore. He sold it way back in 2001.

  • by John Hasler ( 414242 ) on Thursday March 07, 2013 @11:38PM (#43112775) Homepage

    It is already firmly established in USA law that ineffectual DRM measures (such as pdf passwords) that can be trivially bypassed by methods such as using software that does not actively support the measure do not qualify as anticircumvention measures under the DMCA. Accessing a Web page which is "protected" only by JS and so can be accessed by Lynx or Firefox with NoScript does not violate the DMCA. Saying "Please don't copy this" is not DRM.

    > And it can be argued that you accepted the license by
    > accessing the site and copying the data. Don't like the
    > license?

    To bind me to a contract you must show me the contract and condition my receipt of the document on my acceptance of the license.

    > Read, but you may not copy.

    Fair use does not require the copyright owner's permission.

  • by Entropius ( 188861 ) on Friday March 08, 2013 @02:18AM (#43113421)

    Go back and read the GPL. There's a clever little idea in there:

    It says: "You don't have to agree to this license to use this software. However you got the copy you've got, you're welcome to do anything you want with it which is otherwise permitted to you. However, you're not allowed to redistribute this software, since I've got a copyright on it, unless you agree to these terms."

    A license is a thing that lets you do something beyond the rights that you have by default. What you're claiming is that it's legally enforceable to give someone a book and then putting a note inside the front cover saying "You can't read this book unless you do X". No, you sold me the damn book -- it's mine and I can do whatever I want with it, so long as I don't violate your copyright.

I've noticed several design suggestions in your code.