Teresa wrote:Directly quoting material without attribution is plaigarism, or stealing. As Cindy indicates, quoting short attributed passages for 'commentary' and for informative purposes is ok. NZ is partially incorrect in his quote above: see section a) of the website he cites. *Any* copying of another's work without their permission is copyright infringement. The 'criminal infringement' clause is what makes it actionable in court; it is in there to prevent nuisance lawsuits for mere pennies and to ensure the 'fair use' clause of copyright is maintained. Even though one cannot sue for criminal infringement of less than $1,000 or for non-commercial use without perimission, one can file *civil actions* (for example: cease and desist) over any infringement, or else the law has no teeth.
Yes - you're quite right. Sorry to be misleading by only commenting on the "criminal" aspects of copyright. Just to be clear - I don't advocate using someone else's copyrighted material without permission. That's not nice. I was just investigating what constitutes a serious criminal offense in the US, rather than a civil court sue-someone-to-cease-and-desist etc thing.
And now back to your regular program...