autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [evolution-disc.] Keep up with Fontana from home!

To: "Eric Linnhoff" <knuckledragger@kcweb.net>
Subject: Re: [evolution-disc.] Keep up with Fontana from home!
From: "David W. James" <vnend@adelphia.net>
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 12:34:42 -0500
On Saturday, March 8, 2003, at 02:45 AM, Eric Linnhoff wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> Really!!  Legal cite, please?
>>
>> Because the Bern Convention on Copyright says otherwise, and has been
>> US Law since, when was it, '86? '89? Something like that.
> ==================================================

> The Berne Convention was far from only about copyrights.  Mostly, it 
> covered
> artistic materials but was written in 1971 greatly predating email and 
> all
> of its spam-esque anomalies.  And I've never heard Heyward referred to 
> as
> artistic.  _Autistic_, perhaps.  ;^)

        Ah.  I see what is going on here.  A little knowledge is a dangerous 
thing.

        The Berne Convention does indeed address copyrights.  When the US 
joined the treaty on March 1, 1989 the practical effect was supersede 
several sections of the 1976 copyright law. In particular, a copyright 
notice was no longer required for the author/creator of a work to have 
copyright; copyright vested the moment the work was set it tangible 
form.

> For starters, the poster doesn't have a copyright on the written 
> material as
> I seriously doubt they deposited two copies with the US Copyright 
> office of
> their "creation".

        Irrelevant. For the simple form, see 
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html, the section on "HOW TO 
SECURE A COPYRIGHT".  The executive summary is in the header "Copyright 
Secured Automatically upon Creation".  Registration of a work with the 
copyright office gives the copyright holder additional benefits, but is 
not required to have the copyright.

> Secondly, it came to me via email though Yahoo.  I didn't
> go to it.  Sure I subscribe to the list but I do not subscribe to the
> original author.  That makes it unsolicited, from the poster.  Yahoo
> expressly claims unlimited redistribution rights of any submitted 
> material.
> Also, since this is an "open" list, "fair use" redistribution is 
> granted by
> the list server.  It's black & white in their Terms of Service.

        Yahoo can claim to own the moon, that doesn't make it so.  If I type 
in an AP news item or a story out of a magazine and mail it to a Yahoo 
list that doesn't mean that Yahoo now has the right to redistribute it. 
  Add in the fact that one can be subscribed to a Yahoo list without 
ever visiting Yahoo (by a group owner, for example) or reading their 
'agreement', I rather doubt it would stand a serious court challenge.  
Last, I really don't think they *want* ownership of everything that 
comes through their lists; one kiddy-porn story could cause the company 
a world of hurt.

        And your argument is sophistic; when you joined the list, you 
requested all mail sent to the list.  Not that that matters in any way 
with regard to copyright.

> Then there's the concept of "fair use".

        Irrelevant, as you were talking about using the whole work.
        
> It also can't really be considered "intellectual property" because 
> nobody is
> willing to pay the owner to use it such as is the case with books, 
> magazine
> articles or music.

        You really need to take a college level class on copyright.  Or at 
least read the web page I referred to above.  Since you asked for 
cites, I'll quote the web page referenced above:

"WHAT IS COPYRIGHT?

Copyright is a form of protection provided by the laws of the United 
States
(title 17, U.S. Code) to the authors of original works of authorship, 
including
literary, dramatic, musical, artistic, and certain other intellectual 
works.
This protection is available to both published and unpublished works. "

You will note that it doesn't say "has to be paid for" in there.  And 
if you haven't seen some of the stuff that gets submitted to literary 
magazines by unpublished authors, well, trust me, most of it is nothing 
*anyone* would pay for.  But it is protected by copyright just as much 
as Steven King's next work.


> To put it plainly, it isn't physical property either so that dog won't 
> hunt.

        Ah.  So the nightly news isn't copyrighted?  (It isn't physical 
property, as it is going in the camera, out the antenna and into your 
tv. But just try to claim it to be public domain. Same for football or 
baseball, just to name two.)

        You are sorely misinformed.  To quote the copyright office:

"WHAT WORKS ARE PROTECTED?

        Copyright protects "original works of authorship" that are fixed
in a tangible form of expression. The fixation need not be directly 
perceptible
so long as it may be communicated with the aid of a machine or device. 
Copyrightable
works include the following categories:

  literary works;
  musical works, including any accompanying words
  dramatic works, including any accompanying music
  pantomimes and choreographic works
  pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works
  motion pictures and other audiovisual works
  sound recordings
  architectural works

These categories should be viewed broadly. For example, computer 
programs
and most "compilations" may be registered as "literary works"; maps and
architectural plans may be registered as "pictorial, graphic, and 
sculptural works"

> I have a greater claim to the pictures I have posted on my Geocities 
> web
> page as copyrighted material.  And I know of several places on the web 
> that
> have (technically) illegally posted copies of my pictures.

        You have exactly the same claim, not greater or lesser.  You have a 
copyright, the same way I have copyright on this letter.

        Oh, and note, sending it to a mailing list counts as publication...

> Your turn David.  Care to cite case examples of email copyright
> infringement?  Oh yes, check out _my_ new disclaimer below.

I hope you don't mind if I simply quote the Copyright Office instead of 
citing a court case:

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ66.html:

"Copyright protects original authorship fixed in tangible form. 17 
U.S.C. sec. 102(a).
For works transmitted online, the copyrightable authorship may consist 
of text, artwork,
music, audiovisual material (including any sounds), sound recordings, 
etc. Copyright
does NOT protect ideas, procedures, systems, or methods of operation. 
17 U.S.C. sec.
102(b).

"Under U.S. law, copyright protection subsists from the time the work 
is fixed. Copyright registration is not mandatory, but it has important 
benefits. For general information
about copyright, request Circular 1, Copyright Basics. See For 
Further Information
on page 4 on how to obtain circulars and other information."

Also note the section on Newsletters.

You might also find http://www.piercelaw.edu/tfield/mtct/mtct96.htm 
interesting.

> Eric Linnhoff

> WARNING: I reserve the right to use any email you send
> to me as either a testimonial of how great our world is, or
> as an example of the stupid things people send to me via
> email. If you do not want your email to be used in such a
> manner, DON'T SEND IT!

You can't reserve a 'right' you don't have.  In this particular case, 
insistence on this would be foolish; it would either end up with you 
being the only person posting to the list (kind of perverse, don't you 
think?) or simply being kicked off it.

David
Been there, wrote the papers, got the degree.

///  unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net  or try
///  http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
///  Partial archives at http://www.team.net/archive


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>