Posting News Articles On Thai Visa

[cat5]

I didn't get an answer to the question below, so I'm posting this as a new topic.

------------

QUOTE (soundman @ 2009-03-16 08:04:35)Thai Visa News Clippings posters please note:

You may now reproduce part of, or the entire article from Bangkok Post website, however, you must include the title, author and link to the article.

Thank-you.

---------------------

Does that just apply to Thai Visa, or any website that quotes from the Bangkok Post? I'd be interested in a link if you have one. I've often wondered about the legality of posting entire news clippings to the Thai Visa website, which to me appears to exceed any definition of "fair use".

Certainly, if I were running the website or newspaper from which the articles were being copied, in full, I would not be happy.

Edit: corrected my grammar. :-)

Edited March 21, 2009 by cat5

[grahamhc]

The problem with Bangkok Post is their links are only live for a few days . After that time you have to register and PURCHASE each article you wish to read.

Other newspapers leave their stories ON-LINE, so you can read them on the Newspaper's own website.

If Bangkok Post started doing that, you could post links with confidence.

I believe Bangkok Post have outsourced their on-line version and that is why you have this revenue generating problem.

I also hate their unrelated hyperlinks which have nothing to do with the words underlined.

[sbk]

moving to forum support--

actually this is already under discussion in forum support and can be found here. and here

[cat5]

moving to forum support--

actually this is already under discussion in forum support and can be found here. and here

Thanks for those links.

[cat5]

......After that time you have to register and PURCHASE each article you wish to read.

That being so, it seems most unlikely the Bangkok Post would be happy with any forum reproducing its articles either in part or in full. Of course, I can understand why Thai Visa does it, as reproducing and commenting on Bangkok Post news stories accounts for a lot of its activity. If they got rid of that, we'd only be left with personal tales of woe from Pattaya.

[cat5]

Just checked the Bangkok Post website FAQ. They expect users to ask permission to link to articles (link, not copy) although I don't know how they could possibly enforce that. Hmm... I can't link to that FAQ without permission so I'll paste it here. ....

Question: I am writing to ask permission to LINK to a Bangkok Post article to post on our site.

Answer: We wish to see how you will present the link > on your web page first. Please send the reason and a screenshot to: Web Master

[Steve2UK]

The problem with Bangkok Post is their links are only live for a few days . After that time you have to register and PURCHASE each article you wish to read.

Other newspapers leave their stories ON-LINE, so you can read them on the Newspaper's own website.

If Bangkok Post started doing that, you could post links with confidence.

I believe Bangkok Post have outsourced their on-line version and that is why you have this revenue generating problem.

I also hate their unrelated hyperlinks which have nothing to do with the words underlined.

I think it's actually 60 days - at least that seems to be the line drawn between finding articles in a standard online search (on their site) and being referred to the "purchase" archive. While plainly not as good as full/free access provided by other publications, 60 days should serve the purposes of most?

I do also think that this is another reason why Bangkok Post articles should be quoted in full - assuming the Post agree (I have reason to believe that they are agreeable and soundman's post appears to confirm it).

Incidentally, IMO the conditions attached to quoting Bangkok Post articles should be applied to all quoted articles from whatever source i.e. :

Link (a URL hotlink that actually works and takes you to the article on the source's website)

Title of the article

Writer's name credited (where applicable - some articles carry a byline and some don't)

[grahamhc]

I think it's actually 60 days - at least that seems to be the line drawn between finding articles in a standard online search (on their site) and being referred to the "purchase" archive. While plainly not as good as full/free access provided by other publications, 60 days should serve the purposes of most?

Thanks for that. Yes, 60 days are OK, but in the early days, it appeared to be about 7-14 days and that is why I stopped looking anymore.

Or maybe the TV links were changed. Some newspapers change the location URL as the article matures to an archived location.