I may be a worm but at least I respect that others might have a different take on how best to make creative work an attainable way of life since before copyright law it was basically "have a wealthy patron who steered if not outright commissioned what you would produce"
So? If the newspaper's website is willing to serve the documents, what's the problem?
The point is, if you're pleading with others to respect ""intellectual property"" then you're a worm serving corporate interests against your own.
I may be a worm but at least I respect that others might have a different take on how best to make creative work an attainable way of life since before copyright law it was basically "have a wealthy patron who steered if not outright commissioned what you would produce"