<?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: RSS, copyright, and licenses</title>
	<atom:link href="http://aralbalkan.com/780/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://aralbalkan.com/780</link>
	<description>Changing the world through technology and oratory.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 22:44:39 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7-beta2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Stefan Richter</title>
		<link>http://aralbalkan.com/780/comment-page-1#comment-6796</link>
		<dc:creator>Stefan Richter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:13:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aralbalkan.com/780#comment-6796</guid>
		<description>You've touched on a subject that has many people thinkign these days. I've read an article on econtentmag on this topic recently http://tinyurl.com/tpahf and it comes to similar conclusions - something needs to happen.

An RSS feed is your (or my) content and while I would expect individuals to subscribe to it I wouldn't fing it funny if someone aggregated my feed and slapped ads next to it. Aggregators are ok as long as I submit my feed to them, not the other way round. If feeds were free for all I could start a dozen sites tomorrow with high quality content, for free. Can't be right can it?

I also noticed more and more sites are now starting to putting usage restrictions and copyright notices next to their feeds. Example: http://today.reuters.com/rss/newsrss.aspx

Stefan</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;ve touched on a subject that has many people thinkign these days. I&#8217;ve read an article on econtentmag on this topic recently <a href="http://tinyurl.com/tpahf" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/tpahf</a> and it comes to similar conclusions - something needs to happen.</p>
<p>An RSS feed is your (or my) content and while I would expect individuals to subscribe to it I wouldn&#8217;t fing it funny if someone aggregated my feed and slapped ads next to it. Aggregators are ok as long as I submit my feed to them, not the other way round. If feeds were free for all I could start a dozen sites tomorrow with high quality content, for free. Can&#8217;t be right can it?</p>
<p>I also noticed more and more sites are now starting to putting usage restrictions and copyright notices next to their feeds. Example: <a href="http://today.reuters.com/rss/newsrss.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://today.reuters.com/rss/newsrss.aspx</a></p>
<p>Stefan</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GaBuBu</title>
		<link>http://aralbalkan.com/780/comment-page-1#comment-6350</link>
		<dc:creator>GaBuBu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Oct 2006 20:36:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aralbalkan.com/780#comment-6350</guid>
		<description>totally agree with you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>totally agree with you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
