When I asked what posting an article to the public implies I didn't simply mean that they made it available. I mean they are phycally transfering the story onto a machine built for media viewing and reproduction, a machine that you as the person viewing the article has ownership of, and other then some software code that you agree liensing terms to before using you pretty much own any data on that computer.
Way to miss the point.
Granted, a copy must technically be made for you to view the page/article/material on your system. Perhaps the difficulty you're having--and you pretty clearly seem to have difficulty with the basic concept--is exacerbated by the use of the word 'copy'. If we change the word 'copy' to 'republish', will it help you to understand that what you're describing falls very neatly into the list of activities that are considered copyright violation?
For the purposes of this Act, "copyright", in relation to a work ... includes the sole right
(f) in the case of any literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work, to communicate the work to the public by telecommunication,
Note the phrase "includes the sole right". Unless you are the copyright holder or have permission from whoever is, you may not reproduce a complete work "word for word." You can debate all day whether you think this is fair or reasonable or whether the law ought to be this way, but as it stands my non-professional opinion is that you're legally in the wrong.