1994-02-01 - Re: archiving on inet

Header Data

From: “Perry E. Metzger” <pmetzger@lehman.com>
To: Chris Knight <cknight@crl.com>
Message Hash: 742b7b74525e3aa3924387eb49f6014e62d01b587383be4e5f3ef9ca134780c9
Message ID: <199402012029.PAA03234@snark>
Reply To: <Pine.3.87.9402011113.A18730-0100000@crl.crl.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-02-01 20:30:38 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 1 Feb 94 12:30:38 PST

Raw message

From: "Perry E. Metzger" <pmetzger@lehman.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 94 12:30:38 PST
To: Chris Knight <cknight@crl.com>
Subject: Re: archiving on inet
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.87.9402011113.A18730-0100000@crl.crl.com>
Message-ID: <199402012029.PAA03234@snark>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

Chris Knight says:
> If all you are concerned with is "Material differnce", then you think 
> it's perfectly ok for me to sell you a good copy of a magazine?  By your 
> "logic" (loosely used), you had to pay for the copy, and you had to pay 
> for the original, so what's the difference?  The difference is the WILL 
> AND PERMISSION of the author!  As the author of this message, I willingly 
> placed it within the net.  I HAVE NOT, NOR WILL NOT, GIVE FREE PERMISSION 

Try to sue for damages when your work is available for free to
millions of people. The judge will laugh in your face, copyright or
no. Damages are, after all, related to lost revenue -- if you allow
anyone who wants to see something for free in one medium, you will
have a fucking hard time to keep them from examining it in another
equivalent medium. Usenet is NOT a magazine. Failing to put a
copyright notice in your work destroys whats left of your ability to
do anything. I'm sure you can pay a lawyer to sue for you, but this
isn't exactly one anyone is going to take on contingency.