Thread:Janus100/@comment-28398720-20160726205730/@comment-28398720-20160825171847

It is not the ramblings, I like the discussion and value your opionion, which is why I keep coming back. But the nature of the topic requires us to take extra care (same as the Ricky vs JR thing), and lets be fair your stated interest in copyright doesn't make your interpretation any less original research then who ever made Lost original notice.

For example you mention that our use do not qualify for 'educational purpose' because we are not an educational site and that your prefer we say 'informational purposes' instead -- I am not certain of your interpretation of 'educational purpose' limits, or what 'informational purposes' means; also IMO you make no distinction between transcript sites (like http://www.imsdb.com/disclaimer/) and our in terms of format\info and additional use such as documentation\reference for on our episode analysis.


 * "I feel it's better not to have a disclaimer on transcripts".

We currently don't have any legal disclaimer on transcripts other than the MP, and I already said I am not planning on adding the one from lost.

And BTW, to answer your previous question, I do believe that most of our content qualifies under current acceptable practices of fairuse (although not always marked correctly atm). Also it should be noted that copyright law does not exactly specify how to apply fair use, and wikipidea strict guidelines aren't the limits of fair use rights.