From: dirsec <unicorn@schloss.li>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 14:48:14 +0800
To: "Timothy C. May" <tcmay@got.net>
Subject: Re: IPG and "Free Samples"
In-Reply-To: <ad75b4b104021004968a@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960320203811.14126A-100000@polaris.mindport.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Wed, 20 Mar 1996, Timothy C. May wrote:

> At 7:42 PM 3/20/96, Michael Froomkin wrote:
> >correct me if I'm wrong, but don't the federal direct mail marketing laws
> >say that any unsolicited merchandise sent to a person becomes their
> >property, regardless of any disclaimers to the contrary included in the
> >package?
> 
> The _physical_ item, e.g., a box of soap or a free copy of "Newsweek," but
> presumably not the _intellectual property_, e.g, the contents of
> "Newsweek."
> 
> (Just because I get free samples of magazines does not mean I now can do
> with the contents whatever I wish, such as post them on the Net; copyright
> law is presumably involved.)

However, there is a case to be made that a basic difference between a 
magazine, in this example, and source code exists.

The magazine itself is the instrumentality.  When it's mailed to you, you 
can give it to whomever you like.  The pages and paper are your property, 
along with the ink.

In the case of the code, it is itself the instrumentality.  Handing it 
out for free (unsolicited and without a binding NDA) might render the 
item itself (the code) public domain.  (Or more accurately, the 
act of so distributing it renders it defacto in the public 
domain).  Especially in the context in which this code was released.

I'm not sure it's a compelling argument in and of itself, but in the 
context of the manner of distribution, and the major goof on the part of 
IDG in releasing the material generally, I would suspect no one has much 
to worry about.  Asking for a public review of material, and then 
enforcing "copyrights" when that review releases some of, perhaps even 
all of the material is rather silly.  I'd be surprised if a court paid 
much attention.

Disclaimer: this is an academic, and not a legal opinion.

[Mr. May's disclaimer deleted]

> --Tim May
> 
> Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software!
> We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed.
> ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
> Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
> tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
> W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
> Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1  | black markets, collapse of governments.
> "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

---
My prefered and soon to be permanent e-mail address: unicorn@schloss.li
"In fact, had Bancroft not existed,       potestas scientiae in usu est
Franklin might have had to invent him."    in nihilum nil posse reverti
00B9289C28DC0E55  E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information