<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Batesline too hard on World</title>
	<atom:link href="http://okiedoke.com/blog/?feed=rss2&#038;p=440" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://okiedoke.com/blog/?p=440</link>
	<description>Vintage Okie opinion with a twist of lime</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:17:12 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: mary, queen of scots</title>
		<link>http://okiedoke.com/blog/?p=440&#038;cpage=1#comment-1068</link>
		<dc:creator>mary, queen of scots</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2005 23:14:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=440#comment-1068</guid>
		<description>I think this whole issue is informative and terribly interesting.

Thanks for the informative and interesting posts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think this whole issue is informative and terribly interesting.</p>
<p>Thanks for the informative and interesting posts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: novachild</title>
		<link>http://okiedoke.com/blog/?p=440&#038;cpage=1#comment-1056</link>
		<dc:creator>novachild</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2005 21:55:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=440#comment-1056</guid>
		<description>I think Fair Use applies here.

And regardless, it is the responsibility of Tulsa World, and not netizens, to secure content if they wish for it to be presented in a way other than what the http:// protocol was designed for.

I don&#039;t usually agree with 90% of Batesline posts, but he does have a right to exercise his freedom of speech. It is only fair that he is allowed to quote the targets of his criticism and link to their content.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think Fair Use applies here.</p>
<p>And regardless, it is the responsibility of Tulsa World, and not netizens, to secure content if they wish for it to be presented in a way other than what the http:// protocol was designed for.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t usually agree with 90% of Batesline posts, but he does have a right to exercise his freedom of speech. It is only fair that he is allowed to quote the targets of his criticism and link to their content.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://okiedoke.com/blog/?p=440&#038;cpage=1#comment-1035</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Feb 2005 05:25:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=440#comment-1035</guid>
		<description>&lt;a HREF=&quot;http://www.azoidx.com/archives/2005/02/15/10.48.56/&quot; TARGET=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;azoidX&lt;/a&gt; dug up some good information on the legal aspects.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a HREF="http://www.azoidx.com/archives/2005/02/15/10.48.56/" TARGET="_blank">azoidX</a> dug up some good information on the legal aspects.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Delia</title>
		<link>http://okiedoke.com/blog/?p=440&#038;cpage=1#comment-1034</link>
		<dc:creator>Delia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Feb 2005 05:10:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=440#comment-1034</guid>
		<description>Oh yes, you do have to register to see the Tulsa World&#039;s site (past the home page) - in fact, you have to have a paid subscription unless you subscribe to the print edition, which graciously comes with a complimentary pass to the website. 

I sent an email to one of their &#039;technology guys a couple of weeks ago asking if/when they were going to roll out a password-protected RSS feed. (Even the Daily Disappointment has RSS feeds, for cryin&#039; out loud.) So far I haven&#039;t received a reply, and I really don&#039;t expect to. They think the subscription site is the wave of the future.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh yes, you do have to register to see the Tulsa World&#8217;s site (past the home page) &#8211; in fact, you have to have a paid subscription unless you subscribe to the print edition, which graciously comes with a complimentary pass to the website. </p>
<p>I sent an email to one of their &#8216;technology guys a couple of weeks ago asking if/when they were going to roll out a password-protected RSS feed. (Even the Daily Disappointment has RSS feeds, for cryin&#8217; out loud.) So far I haven&#8217;t received a reply, and I really don&#8217;t expect to. They think the subscription site is the wave of the future.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joel</title>
		<link>http://okiedoke.com/blog/?p=440&#038;cpage=1#comment-1033</link>
		<dc:creator>Joel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Feb 2005 04:43:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=440#comment-1033</guid>
		<description>If nothing else I&#039;m pissed at The World for making Tulsa look so backward. It&#039;s not we don&#039;t already have to fight that stereotype and then somebody goes and sends a cease and desist over links! Gimme a break!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If nothing else I&#8217;m pissed at The World for making Tulsa look so backward. It&#8217;s not we don&#8217;t already have to fight that stereotype and then somebody goes and sends a cease and desist over links! Gimme a break!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: OKPartisan</title>
		<link>http://okiedoke.com/blog/?p=440&#038;cpage=1#comment-1032</link>
		<dc:creator>OKPartisan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Feb 2005 02:29:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=440#comment-1032</guid>
		<description>Wow. They say you can&#039;t even link to their site? You don&#039;t have to register to see it, so why can&#039;t someone link to it? Any legal scholars out there who can answer this one for us?  I could see that if you had to register, and the link somehow got people around having to register, they could have a legitimate complaint.  Otherwise, I just don&#039;t see it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow. They say you can&#8217;t even link to their site? You don&#8217;t have to register to see it, so why can&#8217;t someone link to it? Any legal scholars out there who can answer this one for us?  I could see that if you had to register, and the link somehow got people around having to register, they could have a legitimate complaint.  Otherwise, I just don&#8217;t see it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
