Any legal experts in the house?

[RblDiver]

Are there any people in here with some legal background (not as in law enforcement, but more like lawyer types)? See, I had a question for ya to ponder/perhaps give me an answer.

In the HL2 forum, someone was asking for people to scan the magazine that is going to have the HL2 preview (I will be calling it PC Gamer since they had the first HL2 preview, but I know it is called something else but never can remember the name). It was locked since they don't want to support the exchange of copyrighted material on the website, which I can understand.

My question is this: How firm a footing would PC Gamer have to actually demand that a site remove scans from their magazine? See, I was looking, and I think that by posting in a certain fashion, this would actually fall under the Fair Use section of the US Copyright laws. I understand that if the entire article was scanned/posted, then this would probably be in violation of the fair use, since it would be using a significant portion of the work (greater than 50% is a number I've seen floating around), as well as causing economic harm to them (by more people reading on the inet than buying their mag, since I think that's the only reason people'd buy it).

However, what if the HL2net staff posted it in a news-reporting fashion (a fair use)? So, for example, perhaps on the front page they posted something like "PC Gamer came out with a cool HL2 article in their mag today. Here's one of the screenshots that they posted (insert scanned picture here). They gave lots of info too, like HL2 went gold, it was released yesterday, etc (insert quotes from the magazine, but not too many). Go buy your copy today!"

Now, wouldn't this be a fair use? A, it is a non-profit use of the work (at least, I assume it would be), B, not a significant portion would be used (if done in the manner in which I specified), and C, it shouldn't cause economic harm to their magazine (again, by only posting a bit of it, it'd be like a taste of the real thing).

So, if any legal scholars would care to explain to me whether I'm correct, partially correct, or just plain off my rocker, I would love to know. I've been curious about this ever since PC Gamer (the real one, not the UK one I "mentioned") came out with their HL2 preview and everyone was slammed for posting scans. Of course, that time I actually had my own copy so I wasn't too worried, but still heh.

 

[The Dark Elf]

You were already given reasons, twice actually, and just looking at this second thread I can see why Munro locked it

And I'm locking this one to prevent arguments and flaming. Though the staff can still reply if they want and remind you again of the reasons

 

[Chris D]

Consider this:

13,000 registered members on this forum.
13,000 people want to see that particular article only.
13,000 people NOT buying the magazine and instead downloading scans of the article on this website.
13,000 x £5 = £65,000

That's how the PC gaming magazines would look at it. It's exactly the same as piracy at the end of the day. If we are costing a company like that, that sort of money by eliminating the need for their consumers to buy their product then they could sue for damages / lost revenue. HalfLife2.Net cannot afford that.

Obviously you had seen that and reasoned a more gradual approach to releasing information and screenshots. This would still lose the magazine some revenue and HalfLife2.Net could still be liable to pay that.

 

[ComradeBadger]

It's against copyright laws to scan and distribute magazines. It's like copying CDs and selling them to your mates.

So, therefore, we don't endorse or in any way support this illegal practice.