Regarding the ‘creative commons’ license – its good sense to assume that unless there is a specific reference on the site stating the blog is under that license you should assume it isn’t. It really is that simple and that clear. So the assumption, regardless of the creation of a creative commons license, should be that everything is under copyright. If upon investigation the article you want isn’t – go for broke, but until then, you should assume you don’t have the right to just copy large portions of someone else’s work.

I may be a smudge sensitive about this topic – several people have attempted to copy my entire spreadsheets site, including the associated blog at about.com. The whole excuse of “oh, but I assumed it would be creative commons…” just doesn’t wash with me anymore.

I usually have my qoutes as blockquotes in html (too much blogs: I just wrote blogquotes …), they have a css for them and I link to the name. I most of the time only link the first name plus often do the title of the entry.

Only rarely I do quote a bit and write nearly nothing, but link it.

So I am one of the good girls? ;)

(But I did know how to write proper usenet postings even without reading the faqs ..)

For the part of fullquoting: I assume every western country has the same copyright laws on this where you are NOT allowed to make fullquotes. But then again, most of the people don’t have any clues about licencing etc …

Yes – I’m thinking of changing my name to Darrne Rouso – and going for an oscar.

Pascoe – hmmm…RMouse might not roll off the tongue quite right.

So, interpretnig by your last para above literally, we’re to pronounce your name ‘Darren RMouse’ ? Got it! :-)

//smart-arse comment (its Friday, i’m stretching).

On topic however, Shel & Neville of For Immediate Release spoke more about the whole replicating posts issue in the FIR from 11/4… apparently its rife across PR/marketing blogs particularly ..