Copyright And Intellectual Property

[billmi]

I argued fair use because Rabid claimed it was a press release. Press Releases are intended to be spread. Even AP doesn't copyright their press releases. If it's not a press release then fair use no longer applies.

Fair use is entirely unrelated. The reason a press release can usually be further distributed is because it's creator/owner allows that distribution (that was the purpose for creating a release in the first place.) When you see a press release on a web site, or in other news media, the news media isn't the owner of the release, they are a distributor. The original owner grants permission for duplication and distribution of the release.

Exclusive interviews that get used to create an article are a whole other ball of wax.

My other issue was with the fact that 68caliber is copyrighting PTP and NPPL stuff. They didn't create the articles and I'm pretty sure they didn't buy the copyright off the NPPL at least. Used with permission and copyrights are two different things. That bothers me.

Yes, but it's still appropriate for a copyright message to appear with it, because the HTML presentation you are viewing with your web browser was created and by 68caliber.com, as a derivative work of the original press release (again with permission of the owner of the release's copyright.)