On May 6, 2005, at 3:53 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote:
I doubt seriously your *extremely* strict interpretation of copyright would hold up in any court of law in the US or anywhere else for that matter. I have no doubt that you could find a judge somewhere to rule in your favor. After all, judges make incredibly stupid rulings daily. But in the end, your argument would fall on deaf ears when saner minds were engaged.
It would fall under fair use. While the interpretation would allow leeway, I don't think any reasonable, sane person would have an expectation of privacy for posting to a technical mailing list that has references to the archives in a medium where quoting your material is expected in due course of discussion, and no one is profiting from your work and you're not being deprived of income because of it.
Although I do think these posts are copyrighted...you just have an implied consent for certain uses. If I give a long explanation on how some particular technology works, you can't copy it and paste it into a book you're writing without my permission, and the existence of my posts on the archives would give me ammunition against you.
The most laughable part...the archives actually help enforce the copyrights he claims are being trodden on.
When you post to a public list, your post are not copyrighted material. They exist in the public domain. And *this* list *is* a public forum.
Publicly accessible, but you still own your words. I think I already posted some links that talk about copyright, but wikipedia has a nice summary. Electronic formats like web pages and such are still copyrighted because they can take a tangible form (printed out, video taped, etc.). At least, that's my understanding.
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
