The Explainer Gets it Wrong About Bin Laden's Copyright
Strangely, Slate's Explainer column argues that by reprinting Osama Bin Laden's work in its entirety without payment or permission for a book, Doubleday is not violating Bin Laden's copyrights. The column says that Doubleday could claim fair use. Huh? Where did they get this idea?
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)