comment: >
  
  This NYT story adds a bit more context.
context: Fun fact, to reset your Reuters article limit, clear your site cache and cookies, reload the page and boom, temporary fix to pay wall. >
  
  I'd rather give the click to something that doesn't feel the need to make me go through hoops to just read an article. >
  
  They are a very big source of news which other 'free' news sites often cite. >
  
  "I wrote this! It is mine!"
  "Please leave this office, Representative Santos." >
  
  What was his end game? >
  
  The story says he was doing it in “an effort to claim authors' works as his own”. Which makes no sense, as he should know that wouldn’t hold up to even a little scrutiny. It’s a weird story. >
  
  Agreed! But,  to pull this off ( he’s not stupid )he must have some end game in mind that somehow avoids scrutiny >
  
  Looking at other articles, the more likely answer is that he was doing this to shop the works around to secondary publishers (movie rights, foreign language publishers, etc).
  So, if I understand those articles correctly, he wasn’t trying to claim them as his own, but he was trying to build a rep as a go-to middleman that gets things early, and who you pay for material if you’re a secondary publisher to make decisions and offers before other secondary publishers get the opportunity.
  It’s still not clear, and everyone is like “yeah, we don’t know what his deal was, but this is the only possible monetary/professional value that this material would have”.
  Everyone seems to be confused, and I’m not well versed in the world of middlemen and post-publication monetization, so I could be off a bit, but that seems to be the gist. >
  
  Thank you ! >
  
  His sentence will probably be to edit them for publication.