Copyright isn't being circumvented - the content of the website is made available for the public and the website just grabs what is publicly available.

▲

boplicity 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Redistributing copyrighted content is the literal definition of copyright infringement. Using it for your own purposes, without distribution, is another story.

This link was posted with intent to facilitate the distribution of copyrighted material. The person who posted it justified posting the link by saying some people don't have a subscription.

I understand that some people think copyright shouldn't exist, but it clearly is being circumvented here.

	▲	mrkstu an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		In the context of use on hacker news, I think the fair use exemption for public comment is a sufficient justification, which is likely why they allow its use.
	▲	amelius 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I'll start caring about copyright when the government starts caring about my personal information that is being traded around the internet (with the help of journalism). Information is money, and we're all being stolen from.