> I think the equivalent would be using, without permission, the entirety of a popular video or song to demo a media player that you wrote.
I disagree with that, since people who make money with movies and music tend to do that via selling access to the media, which the NYT doesn't seem to be doing in this case and the OP consequently doesn't interfere with (even before the OP apparently didn't reproduce the NYT content in its entirety).
> I disagree with that, since people who make money with movies and music tend to do that via selling access to the media
That is excessive rationalization. What the creators intend to do with their content is kinda up to them. The fact that they haven't tried to directly monetize it doesn't somehow make it fair game, and the OP even acknowledges this.
I disagree with that, since people who make money with movies and music tend to do that via selling access to the media, which the NYT doesn't seem to be doing in this case and the OP consequently doesn't interfere with (even before the OP apparently didn't reproduce the NYT content in its entirety).