FT rules forbid the posting of complete copyrighted articles, requiring members to post only a title and introductory paragraphs with a link to the rest. At the same time, anyone can see that members (usually new, but that doesn't matter) often post complete articles anyhow. In this context, I recently came across the following two articles on Wired.com:

Righthaven Expands Troll Operation With Newspaper Giant
The $105 Fix That Could Protect You From Copyright-Troll Lawsuits

Given this:

1. Is IB, or is anyone else at FT, aware of the significant penalties that can be assessed if this rule is violated, and that there is a company whose business is discovering sites that violate it?

2. If so, has FT taken advantage of the $105 fix in the second article?

(This may not exactly be a technical issue, but I couldn't think of a better place to ask. Would have picked ORP if this was still his show, but it ain't.)

pretty sure this was discussed elsewhere, but dont recall if there was any response from admin.

I'm surprised no one from Internet Brands has responded to Efrem in over 3 weeks. As a frequent poster of news articles, I hope I can continue to post them.

linking is not an issue, and while i dont remember whether IB commented, im pretty sure this was discussed in another thread.

Tom,

As well as I can recall as a regular reader of your posts, you don't post complete articles. You post brief excerpts and a link to the rest. That's fine, and that isn't what the lawsuits are about. No worries!

(I'm surprised at the silence from that side, too.)