3 ms·

and your local library and ProQuest are also bound by the same laws, even if they have an existing licensing agreement. from the ToS you just linked (note use o

and your local library and ProQuest are also bound by the same laws, even if they have an existing licensing agreement. from the ToS you just linked (note use of the terms "licensor" and "third party", which would be the NYT in this case): > Restrictions. Except as expressly permitted above, Customer and its Authorized Users shall not: > Remove any copyright and other proprietary notices placed upon the Service or any materials retrieved from the Service by ProQuest or its licensors; > Perform automated searches against ProQuest’s systems (except for non-burdensome federated search services), including automated “bots,” link checkers or other scripts; > Provide access to or use of the Services by or for the benefit of any unauthorized school, library, organization, or user; > Publish, broadcast, sell, use or provide access to the Service or any materials retrieved from the Service in any manner that will infringe the copyright or other proprietary rights of ProQuest or its licensors; > Download all or parts of the Service in a systematic or regular manner or so as to create a collection of materials comprising all or a material subset of the Service, in any form. > Store any information on the Service that violates applicable law or the rights of any third party.

paulmd 3y ago
Grandparent is right that people keep conflating copyright and licensing. That term doesn’t allow you to violate the copyright of a licensor, but, it also doesn’t rule out (eg) fair use. Fair use would have to be blocked via a license, and it’s going to be difficult to argue that someone agrees to a license merely by turning on their radio. Responding to unauthenticated internet requests with content is the internet equivalent of broadcast and similarly the LinkedIn case held that this did not allow LinkedIn to impose terms of service in a contract of adhesion in this fashion.

paulmd 3y ago

Grandparent is right that people keep conflating copyright and licensing. That term doesn’t allow you to violate the copyright of a licensor, but, it also doesn’t rule out (eg) fair use. Fair use would have to be blocked via a license, and it’s going to be difficult to argue that someone agrees to a license merely by turning on their radio. Responding to unauthenticated internet requests with content is the internet equivalent of broadcast and similarly the LinkedIn case held that this did not allow LinkedIn to impose terms of service in a contract of adhesion in this fashion.