NFL has in a private email informed me that I can be held liable for
infringement of copyright law for posting paragraphs of their book to the
raw-food list without their permission.

I responded: "You are allowed to legally copy & copyright virtually all of
"Raw Eating" and help yourself to Phillip Johnson's book in both cases
without any permission and in the case of your book for profit but I cannot
quote a few selected passages in a private non-profit forum as Raw-food
without being threatened by a lawsuit?  I am dead serious, if this is true,
please educate me as the last thing I want to do is to get in trouble with
the law. "

Comment: I have not received any response from NFL so I have educated
myself on the topic. "Fair use" is an exemption to copyright law that was
created to allow things such as commentary, parody, news reporting,
research and education of copyrighted works WITHOUT the permission of the
author.  From the 1996 edition of "The Copyright Handbook" by attorney
Stephen Fishman published by Nolo Press:

"These types of uses are most likely to be fair uses:

- Criticism and comment: - for example, quoting or excerpting a work in a
review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment.

- News reporting: - for example, summarizing an address or article, with
quotations, in a news report.

- Research and scholarship: - for example, quoting a passage in a
scholarly, scientific or technical work for illustration or clarification
of the author's observations."

On the topic of parody: "To parody a work, it is usually necessary to use
some of the original work's expression, so that the readers will be able to
recognize what's being parodied.  However, it is rarely possible to get
permission to parody or satirize someone else's work.  Thus, parodies can
exist only because the fair use doctrine.  Recognizing this, lower courts
have historically held that parody and satire deserve substantial freedom,
both as entertainment and a form of social and literary criticism."

"But what if a parody is so scathing or critical of the original work that
it harms the market for it?  Does this weigh against fair use?  The Supreme
Court answered this question with a resounding no.  Biting criticism is not
copyright infringement, even if it effectively destroys a work both
artistically and commercially."

On the topic of plagiarism:  "Many people believe that plagiarism and
copyright infringement are the same thing.  Not so, a plagiarist is a
person who poses as the originator of words he did not write, ideas he did
not conceive, and/or facts he did not discover.  For purposes of
plagiarism, the material stolen need not be protected by copyright."

On the consequences of plagiarism: "A plagiarist cannot be sued for
copyright infringement if all he takes are unprotected ideas or facts or
words that are in the public domain.  But, publishing contracts usually
contain a provision, called a warranties and indemnities clause, by which
the author promises that the work he submits to the publisher is not in the
public domain.  So, a plagiarist could be sued by his publisher for breach
of contract or possibly fraud.  And, aside from the possible legal
consequences, being accused of plagiarism is usually not good for one's
career.  College professors and journalists have been fired because of
plagiarism."

In their email to me NFL also stated that they had spoken to their attorney
and indicated that they would take legal action against me if I continued
my libel and slander of them.

I responded: "And I am slandering and libeling by exposing you as
plagiarists?  Show me that "Nature's First Law" is NOT a plagiarized
version of "Raw Eating", and I will gladly give you a public apology."

Comment: There can only be slander or libel if any of my statements about
NFL are untrue. I am protected under the law to freely express my opinion
of anybody I wish, and I suggest rather than trying to silence me with
threats of a lawsuit (not unlike Scientology who has also tried to use
copyright law to silence its critics) that they admit that "Nature's First
Law" is indeed a plagiarized version of Arshavir Ter Hovannessian's book
"Raw Eating" and give a public apology for this unfortunate & quite
embarrassing affair.

Best, Peter
[log in to unmask]