Just a reminder to be very careful using anything from the Las Vegas Review-Journal or the Denver Post. Most places will send you a takedown notice, sometimes through their lawyers, before they take it to the next step but this group is going straight for the nuclear option if they consider anything to be infringing.
I would go as far as adding those two newspapers to the list of unacceptable sources to be on the safe side.
A real-estate agent posted a story on his personal site and was sued. The case was dismissed because he adhered to fair-use exemptions:
"The court finds that this use weighs in favor of a fair use of the copyrighted material," Hicks wrote in his ruling, citing case law stating "copying only as much as necessary in a greater work (story) to provide relevant factual information weighs in favor of fair use."
As to whether the online posting affected the potential market for the Review-Journal story, Hicks wrote: "Nelson’s use of the copyrighted material is likely to have little to no effect on the market for the copyrighted news article. Nelson’s copied portion of the work (story) did not contain the author’s commentary. As such, his use does not satisfy a reader’s desire to view and read the article in its entirety the author’s original commentary and thereby does not dilute the market for the copyrighted work. Additionally, Nelson directed readers of his blog to the full text of the work. Therefore, Nelson’s use supports a finding of fair use." http://www.lasvegassun.com/...
I was taught that if you quoted information and gave credit to the source of the information, you were safe from copyright infringement.
Sounds like these guys are doing whatever they can for a few bucks, and it may ultimately backfire on them. You guys may remember when the RIAA started a lawsuit campaign against those that illegally downloaded copyrighted music. While their message was heard loud and clear, these lawsuits also became a public-relations nightmare that served to cause more problems for the RIAA than they solved. Consequently, they halted litigation proceedings (pending and existing) against the low-volume downloaders and, instead, worked with the ISPs to issue notices of copyright infringement via e-mail.