This raises another question broached by Brian Wallis — his assertion that, as a general principle, “comment” automatically constitutes an “alteration” even when said “comment” comprises nothing more than what Mr. Prince acknowledges is “gobblygook” (sic). If even incomprehensible prose inherently represents the activity we call “commenting,” then all speech qualifies as commentary, in which case the “comment” requirement of the “fair use” exception becomes meaningless. […]
|
Follow me on Mastodon:
@adcoleman@hcommons.social
 |
Weighed on the larger scale of things, the proposed methadone clinic’s predictable effect on those homeowners’ property values and sense of security is negligible, and the sacrifices involved on their parts mere fulfillment of their citizenly obligations to the town. […] The simple fact is that, for any creative person who engages with it seriously, the computer makes feasible things that couldn’t have been done before — either because they were impossible or because they were too labor-intensive to be worthwhile. […] |
 SPJ Research Award 2014All content of this publication is © copyright 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 by A. D. Coleman unless otherwise noted. All materials contained on this site are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced for commercial purposes without prior written permission. All photos copyright by the individual photographers. "Fair use" allows quotation of excerpts of textual material from this site for educational and other noncommercial purposes.
Published by Flying Dragon LLC.
|
Nevertheless, They Persisted (1)
I have served as an expert witness in Graham v. Prince et al (15‑cv‑10160) and McNatt v. Prince et al (16‑cv‑08896), providing my services pro bono. This included drafting a written statement on behalf of the plaintiffs — responding to a specific set of questions posed by the lawyers for Graham and McNatt — and sitting through an extensive deposition by Prince’s high-priced lawyers. […]