bmaxey1@juno.com
Date: 02/18/01-03:36:51 PM Z
>>But, if you DO mean those judgements, other than as a stick to beat us
>>with ... then what in the world are you doing here?
Simply, I mean this.... Nothing much new under the sun. There is much
info provided by posters and perhaps it is of value - in fact, I will
back step and say that it is very useful to many, but since we were
talking about mailing lists and protection of e-mail, I do not believe it
to be worth all the hassle of trying to legally protect it. After all,
most of it can't be protected anyway.
Someone mentioned copyrighting the archives. Well, this could be done,
but it would require loads of paperwork every time the archive changes, a
filing fee per submission as well as a copy of the material. Considering
the effort, I think it is impractical to do and really not worth the
bother.
I am not beating you all up. I am, however, adding info based on decades
of dealing with these issues, and will most likely spend decades dealing
with the problems the Internet cause for those trying to reasonably
protect the work.
I ran a custom lab for years and years, and kept cost tabs on the
legalities of copyright. This in its' self was a big job. When I
developed web pages for my employer, I was required to be familiar with
what can and can't be done. Again, a big job. I am not talking out of my
hat - I do have some experience. I was required to work with our HR and
Legal department to make absolutely sure what is posted is not in
violation of the law. One tends to learn much about what is and is not
allowable.
Titles, names, short phrases, and slogans; familiar symbols or designs;
mere variations of typographic ornamentation, lettering, or coloring;
mere listings of ingredients or contents, Ideas, procedures, methods,
systems, processes, concepts, principles, discoveries, or devices, as
distinguished from a description, explanation, or illustration - Can Not
Be Protected.
When you consider this, and the content of mailing lists - This one and
all of the others we all are members of, what info posted does NOT fall
into one of the above categories?
All I am saying about this stems from the idea about protecting mailing
lists and e-mail. Many of you want to take off on a tangent and change
the original intent. Someone posted a comment that implied that the rules
for mailing lists and e-mail generally apply to print media. This is not
the case at all.
If you are unclear about the law, go to the governments web site al
simply look it up for yourself. Please do not yell at me or take me out
of context.
As for my comments about using formulas and techniques on web sites, in
articles or books without fear of ending up in court, so what? Not much
new is posted and most of what is posted is either a known process or one
of many modifications of existing formulas.
No offence Judy, but how much of the info you read here ends up in your
Little Magazine? (NOTE: Little Magazine is not a snide comment - it is a
publishing term for the type of magazine you offer. I WANT TO BE CLEAR).
Am I accusing you of stealing? CERTAINLY NOT!. However, I can safely
assume that some of what you write is based on material that might be
posted here, or historical, or themes and variations on existing
techniques. Have you ever published an issue that is completely original
material? Again, I will assume no. Certainly, feel free to correct me
about my assumptions.
Bob
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 04/02/01-09:55:25 AM Z CST