[shakna]

> For what? Just so you can quickly copy one snippet and be done with it, instead of manually copying author name, content and link and spending 10 seconds to format this yourself.

Unfortunately copyright law is not going to be happy with that one. [0] It's insanely complicated, but basically, as things are at the moment, the original poster has a right to retract the publication at any time. You may find yourself in legal hot water if your copy doesn't disappear at the same time as the original.

[0] https://australiacouncil.gov.au/workspace/uploads/files/soci...

[ghayes]

Under US law, you’d likely be covered by fair-use so long as you’re reporting on the tweet as a news-worthy event (versus, say, asking for lols).

[shakna]

That is precisely the argument made in Agence France Presse v Morel [0], cited in the article I linked to. One of the statements to come out of that rather drawn out and complicated case is:

> plainly sufficient for the jury to conclude that AFP’s infringement was willful under either an actual knowledge or reckless disregard theory

Assuming that you would be covered under fair use, is a "reckless disregard" for theory if you comprehend the copyright situation at all. These things are very, very, complicated and you cannot simply assume that you have the safety to copy a tweet.

[0] https://www.loeb.com/en/insights/publications/2014/08/agence...