From: Chris Knight <cknight@crl.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 94 19:42:11 PST
To: Matthew J Ghio <mg5n+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: archiving on inet
In-Reply-To: <8hFk=cW00awK4AjkdC@andrew.cmu.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.87.9401261901.A26605-0100000@crl.crl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




On Wed, 26 Jan 1994, Matthew J Ghio wrote:

> Chris Knight <cknight@crl.com> wrote:
> 
> >   I may be wrong, but I don't see it this way.  Articles and research
> > papers that I write are copyrighted.  If I choose to distribute these in
> > the net, it's a given that inet providers will have these stored on
> > their drives.  But...  If you archive the net, and compile it into a
> > different media that you then sell(presumably to make a profit),
> > then there is a matter of copyright infringement.  
> 
> So if I sell (at a profit) a netnews feed to subscribers via modem, it
> is not copyright infringement, but if I sell the same data on a CDROM,
> you cliam copyright infringement.  So I suppose you want to give some
> kind of list of what types of media are acceptable for transmitting
> netnews feeds, and which are not?  And I suppose that the Federal
> Copyright Beaureau will then need to enforce a new law to make sure that
> netnews is distributed only via government-approved methods.  Ahh.. I
> can smell the new gummint conspiracy already.
> 
> The plain and simple fact is: When you post a message to usenet, you do
> so with the expectation that others will receive it.  You can have no
> way of knowing or limiting who may get it; that is given by the nature
> of the network.  Usenet news is, and is intended to be, publicly
> accessable information.  If there is something you don't want
> distributed, then DON'T POST IT!
> 

Again, I may be wrong, since I am not a lawyer, nor would I want to be 
shot as one...

You didn't seem to like my thoughts about "media shift"...  Let's say the 
same thing in a different example...  You wrote a letter to 
Communications Week which was published; something you expected.  George 
over there runs a news stand, and he sells Communication Week; nobody has 
a problem with him selling magazines for a living, do we?  But, we have 
Bill over here who subscribed to CW, photocopies articles and letters he 
likes, and compiles these into a book which he then sells... Now we have 
a problem.

I'm not trying to draw lines, but I do see a change of media as a reason 
to request the author's permission to re-publish.  You would be 
distributing the material in a way different than the author intended.


-ck