Haha no. So, lets see... this was used in a non-profit purpose (one could even argue educational) Nature of the work - hmm, looks like a news post to me... last I checked, those get republished all over the place in some form or another The amount and substantiality - well, he quoted a large portion of it Effect upon the potential market or value - as K from MIB once side "Precisely Dick". SO, yeah, I would say that, per the US Copyright office, there is no copyright violation here. If you feel it is/was unworthy of discussion, then yeah, precisely that. Or did you feel the need to point out some perceived flaw in the post just to get a dig in at Sorcerer? Because, honestly, that's what I see in it... if the thread didn't drum up discussion, it would have simply faded into the depths of time. You, however, used it as an excuse to poke and prod at a member without adding anything of substance to the desired topic at hand... I would almost put that at "trolling". Good for them and good for you... but most is not all, and others may very well have used it as a basis for discussion. But, then again, I guess this is your castle now and things must be done only as you see fit. I do apologize, my liege. Let me put it another way - if you genuinely felt the topic had no substance for discussion... why did you not simply state that and lock the thread? You KNEW that your comment about the post would incite a reply from Sorcerer, and I would wager you ALSO knew that, even IF the "point of the article" had no topic for discussion that some form of discussion could still be generated by the trains of thought generated by thinking about the topic of this article. So, tell me Syne, what was your real reason for calling him out like you did?