by Mike Masnick
Wed, Mar 23rd 2011 7:01pm
It's becoming more obvious every day that the NY Times itself doesn't know quite what to make of its own paywall. It's letting people view articles for free if they come from other sites, especially Twitter. The idea, of course, is that they want to encourage people to share stories and visit the site. But, apparently, there are limits to how they want you to share stuff. Specifically, the NYT has asked Twitter to block a user account called @FreeNYTimes, which used the NYT's own API to tweet every headline. Of course, this is admittedly pointless. The NYT, itself, already does that. But, so what? If this gets more people reading the site, is that really such a problem? The NYT, of course, will claim that this is just about the "trademark" issue, but is this really a "use in commerce"? It seems like a perfectly accurate descriptive use. And, really, once again, so what? How does this matter? If you don't tweet the NYT's links in a manner they approve, will they ask Twitter to shut you down? Perhaps the folks at the NYT should focus on actually providing more value to people, rather than worrying about things like this.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Super Slimey: Comodo Tries To Trademark 'Let's Encrypt' [Updated]
- Dweezil Zappa Renames His Tour Again: Dweezil Zappa Plays Whatever The F@%k He Wants; The Cease & Desist Tour
- Good News: California Legislature Dumps Stupid Plan To Copyright All Government Works
- New York Times Says Fair Use Of 300 Words Will Run You About $1800
- You're Entitled To Your Own Opinions, But Not Your Own Facts About Copyright, NY Times Edition