A little note on copyright and the internet.
- No. One does not have to show either pecuniary or pecumiary damages. One
need only to show damage. Courts like to see claims for pecuniary damages,
'cause there is minimal haggling over amounts, nor trouble converting
non-monetary quantities into something that can be measured be currency.
(What's the cost of the loss of a loved one, or the use of a limb?) Yet,
to restate, the harm need NOT be monetary. E.g., cases of slander, libel,
defamation of character, cruelty, mental anguish, pain & suffering,
alienation, negligence or abuse.
Basically, there are three types of property: 1) real property, (land or
the fixtures thereon; 2) chattel, (movable, yet physical property); and 3)
intellectual property, (copyrights, trademarks, patents, etc.). As a
humorous illustration of this last: Some years ago, a male pornography
superstar had a cast made of his 'talent'. It was then, without his
consent, sold as a novelty item, for which he received no compensatory
remuneration. He sued for theft of intellectual property. It was not the
latex which was stolen from him, it was the (inherently personal and
proprietary) size and shape of his 'gift', or 'talent'.
Any single posting's copyright is still vested in the individual poster,
unless (s)he willing and knowingly reässigns it. BUT the COLLECTION, as
arranged, (which I, personally, find to be rather inconvenient), belongs to
to the collector/collator. OI can do with the archives as it sees fit.
Hopefully, they will see fit to do the right thing.