>>Freedom of the press gives us the right to publish even a whole letter (we're not talking about a whole book here), most of the times embedded in a story that should make clear why it's published in its entirety. The person who thinks that such an act is an infringement of copyrights can always go to the court and then it's up to the judge. If the 'publisher' comes with a plausible explanation (justification) why it was best to publish the whole thing, then there's no problem, whether it's the Netherlands or the US.
>
>Well, freedom of the press means you won't go to jail for it. However, it may well be a copyright infringement.
>
>Tamar

Won't go to jail for it? Sounds like someone found a maze in the law, only to bypass a copyright. In reality the judge, and the readers, and the whole nation, are often implicitly or explicitly thankful towards the 'publisher' for having published the letter. Think of frauds and conspiracies. There are other, more important, interests than copyright. Note that I'm not talking about 'books'. I'm talking about letters and e-mails. A main motive to write a book is 'make some money', and the existence of copyright is important for such investment. That's not the case for e-mails and letters. In that case, it's rather a matter of privacy infringement. Privacy, btw, is more important than copyright, imo.