SimplyNews on gemini

Peter Vernigorov pitr.vern at
Tue Mar 2 11:19:23 GMT 2021

If you know it's iffy legally speaking, why do it?

Taking one example from the list, has the
following clause:

> 7.2 The Services are to be used solely for your non-exclusive, non-assignable, non-transferable and limited personal use and for no other purposes. You may not exceed the limited rights and access provided to you under these Terms. You must not alter, delete or conceal any copyright, trademark, service mark or other notices contained on the Services, including, without limitation, notices on any Content you transmit, download, display, print, stream or reproduce from the Services. Except as expressly authorized by Company and set forth in Additional Terms (e.g., Services that allow for the use of embeddable or viral features, applications, etc.), you shall not, nor shall you allow any third party (whether or not for your benefit or otherwise) to, frame, reproduce, modify, create derivative works from, display, perform, publish, distribute, disseminate, broadcast or circulate to any third party (including, without limitation, on or via a third-party website or platform), or otherwise use, any Content without the express, prior written consent of Company or its owner if Company is not the owner. [..]

I imagine other publications have something similar

Previous discussion on a similar subject -

And a quote from Louis from the same thread:

> I think Gemini should be known for genuine content and services, not stripped-down copies and bridges from the http world.

Now if you were using a public API exposed by these publications (if
it exists) and explicitly allow this use case, I think that would be
very much welcomed.

More information about the Gemini mailing list