Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Attribution

Expand Messages
  • John Hern
    A few years back I registered with the United States Copyright Office, Library of Congress, a set of plans I drew for building an aeroplane. My understanding
    Message 1 of 22 , Dec 30, 1998
    • 0 Attachment
      A few years back I registered with the United States Copyright Office,
      Library of Congress, a set of plans I drew for building an aeroplane.
      My understanding at the time, of the copyright system was, that the
      author automatically has a copyright on his production, but gets more
      protection and the right to ask for attorney's fees, if he marks his
      creation and registers it with the Copyright office. Otherwise the
      burden of proof is up to the author, I guess.

      Perhaps some of our list members who are attorneys could check this out
      and clarify it for us.

      John.


      Paul Gough wrote:
      >
      > There has been a lot of discussion of copyright. <snip>
      >
      > >Homestead Press & Cattle Co. wrote:
      > >>
      > >>
      > >> P.S. How the heck do ya make the copyright circle symbol thing with a
      > >> standard computer keyboard and still avoid htm violations? "c"
      > >>
      > >
      > >You write "Copyright, Mike Powers, 1998"
      > >

      --

      John A. Hern Jr. 1900 Millview Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83814
      mailto:hern@... Dipl.Ing. Mechanical Engineer
      Foundry: http://www.nidlink.com/~fouronkey
      Greyhounds: http://www.greyhoundpetsinc.org
    • Tony Stabler
      Option g on a Macintosh produces the © in most complete fonts.
      Message 2 of 22 , Jan 1, 1999
      • 0 Attachment
        'Option g' on a Macintosh produces the © in most complete fonts.
      • Jim Shockey
        There is an interesting FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) document entitled 10 Big Myths about copyright explained which is located at:
        Message 3 of 22 , Jan 1, 1999
        • 0 Attachment
          There is an interesting FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions)
          document entitled "10 Big Myths about copyright explained"
          which is located at:

          http://www.templetons.com/brad//copymyths.html

          This information has been prepared by Brad Templeton, who you
          may know as the founder and original publisher of ClariNet
          Communications Corp. It is not to be considered legal advise,
          rather, it is a compilation of facts gathered by someone who
          spent the better part of a decade dealing with copyright issues
          in a new and uncharted medium -- the "Internet".

          At the end of this FAQ, Brad points the reader to a number of
          web locations where more detailed information may be obtained.
          These other sites range from Brad's own consideration of web
          linking issues to the Library of Congress copyright site.


          Enjoy,

          --Jim <shockey@...> Idaho, USA
          "All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good
          men remain silent and do nothing" --Edmund Burke
        • Harmon Seaver
          ©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©ƒƒƒƒƒ······åß**ß*ƒ©·*°¬…æœ*´®?¥¨ˆø?“‘«*=ç**˜µ?*÷÷ Waaay Kweeel! -- Harmon
          Message 4 of 22 , Jan 1, 1999
          • 0 Attachment
            ©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©ƒƒƒƒƒ······åß**ß*ƒ©·*°¬…æœ*´®?¥¨ˆø?“‘«*=ç**˜µ?*÷÷

            Waaay Kweeel!

            --
            Harmon Seaver hseaver@...
            http://harmon.bml.usouthal.edu
            =======================================================================
            All is impermanent, but this too shall pass away, and the way of the
            Samurai is death -- so speak your mind now, or forever hold your peace.
            =======================================================================
            Copyright, Harmon F. Seaver, 1998. License to distribute this post is
            available to Microsoft for US$1,000 per instance, or local equivalent.
            =======================================================================
          • Richard M. Alderson III
            ... I have had advice on this subject from an attorney who *specializes* in intellectual property law. Mr. Seaver is correct: The law in the U. S. changed in
            Message 5 of 22 , Jan 1, 1999
            • 0 Attachment
              Chris Simonds wrote:

              >Though I know how risky it is to differ with Charmin Harmon, I doubt very
              >much copyright is "automatic." Certainly, to be on the safe side one should
              >register anything one values with Our Friends in Washington.

              I have had advice on this subject from an attorney who *specializes* in
              intellectual property law. Mr. Seaver is correct: The law in the U. S.
              changed in the late 1970s (I forget the date--1976 or 1978); before that
              time, a work had to be registered with the Copyright Office to obtain the
              protection of copyright law. Since that date, anything written (along with
              drawings, photographs, etc.) is *automatically* copyrighted, but damages
              are limited to actual (no punitive damages) unless the work is registered.
              (The advice was in relation to font design and computer programs, as it
              happens!)

              Rich Alderson

              P. S. I am not an attorney, nor do I play one on TV, but I have listened to
              one from time to time...
            • Tom Marshall
              I am very interested in the copyright aspects. To help myself, my query is: if an item is published with an intent that as many people as possible will read
              Message 6 of 22 , Jan 2, 1999
              • 0 Attachment
                I am very interested in the copyright aspects. To help myself, my query is:
                if an item is published with an intent that as many people as possible will
                read it, and there is no intention to obtain a payment for same, can it be
                considered copyright free?

                Tom Marshall
                Whitstable UK
                Pressman@...


                -----Original Message-----
                From: Harmon Seaver <hseaver@...>
                To: LETPRESS@... <LETPRESS@...>
                Date: 31 December 1998 18:42
                Subject: Re: Attribution


                >Neil Giroux wrote:
                >
                >> Harmon: Your notice of an automatic copyright is sure good news. We'd
                all
                >> appreciate by what authority this sweep takes place. Doesn't publication
                on
                >> the net without notice of a copyright attached make the work public and
                for
                >> use by all?
                >>
                >
                > That's US copyright law. In fact, the item doesn't even have to be
                >published. Any creative work is automatically copyrighted, whether or not
                it
                >says so. For instance, I paint a picture, or take a photo -- copyright is
                >automatically granted, and obviously the artist doesn't paint "Copyright,
                etc"
                >on it.
                > And no, publication on the internet absolutely does not make it
                >public. I'm surprised that you as an attorney would think so -- we have to
                >deal with professors at our university who are so naive, but no,
                absolutely,
                >you cannot copy something off the web and then put it up on your own
                webpage
                >--not unless you get their permission in writing. And believe me, you will
                get
                >sued over it, because it is so easy for anyone to have software search
                agents
                >(knowbots, spiders, etc.) to continually search the internet looking for
                >illegal copies of their graphics, words, etc.
                > We in the library world get constant updates, workshops,
                seminars,
                >etc. on the copyright issues -- it's a very big issue for us, and getting
                >bigger all the time, as more and more stuff gets digitized.
                >
                >
                >> And where do we find the law that renders plagarism
                >> illegal?
                >
                > What else is plagarism but copyright infringement?
                >
                > Neil, if you doubt my word, just do some Hotbot or whatever searches
                on
                >copyright. There's oodles, and people generally seem to be pretty naive
                about
                >it. Our professors, for example, are simply astounded to find that papers
                that
                >they wrote, and then had published in a scholarly journal, cannot be put up
                in
                >their own websites -- because they gave up the copyright to the journal as
                >part of the contract to publish. As webmasters, we have to be ultra-careful
                of
                >what is allowed on a website. Even a picture of the cover of a book
                published
                >by a professor has to go through the process of getting written permission
                >from the publisher, you can't just copy it from the publisher's website, or
                >scan it in.
                > In short, the internet is just one giant press. You wouldn't dream of
                >taking a copy of the latest Time magazine and printing it up on your own
                press
                >and selling it, would you? The exact same laws apply to anything on the
                >internet, and US law, at least, assumes copyright with or without noitice.
                >
                >
                >--
                >Harmon Seaver hseaver@...
                http://harmon.bml.usouthal.edu
                >=======================================================================
                >All is impermanent, but this too shall pass away, and the way of the
                >Samurai is death -- so speak your mind now, or forever hold your peace.
                >=======================================================================
                >Copyright, Harmon F. Seaver, 1998. License to distribute this post is
                >available to Microsoft for US$1,000 per instance, or local equivalent.
                >=======================================================================
                >
                >
              • Sam Nielson
                I believe that the only way to be safe about copyright is to have a letter from the copyright holder or creator stating that you either have permission to use
                Message 7 of 22 , Jan 5, 1999
                • 0 Attachment
                  I believe that the only way to be safe about copyright is to have a letter from the copyright holder or creator stating that you either have permission to use it, or that it is specifically copyright free. Otherwise there is the risk of being liable for infringement. Its better to be safe than sorry. This especially being the case with the idea of automatic copyright, you never know if they are relying on that or that it is copyright free.

                  Sam Nielson
                  Rexburg, Idaho, U.S.A.

                  >>> Tom Marshall <pressman@...> 01/02 1:59 PM >>>
                  I am very interested in the copyright aspects. To help myself, my query is:
                  if an item is published with an intent that as many people as possible will
                  read it, and there is no intention to obtain a payment for same, can it be
                  considered copyright free?

                  Tom Marshall
                  Whitstable UK
                  Pressman@...


                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Harmon Seaver <hseaver@...>
                  To: LETPRESS@... <LETPRESS@...>
                  Date: 31 December 1998 18:42
                  Subject: Re: Attribution


                  >Neil Giroux wrote:
                  >
                  >> Harmon: Your notice of an automatic copyright is sure good news. We'd
                  all
                  >> appreciate by what authority this sweep takes place. Doesn't publication
                  on
                  >> the net without notice of a copyright attached make the work public and
                  for
                  >> use by all?
                  >>
                  >
                  > That's US copyright law. In fact, the item doesn't even have to be
                  >published. Any creative work is automatically copyrighted, whether or not
                  it
                  >says so. For instance, I paint a picture, or take a photo -- copyright is
                  >automatically granted, and obviously the artist doesn't paint "Copyright,
                  etc"
                  >on it.
                  > And no, publication on the internet absolutely does not make it
                  >public. I'm surprised that you as an attorney would think so -- we have to
                  >deal with professors at our university who are so naive, but no,
                  absolutely,
                  >you cannot copy something off the web and then put it up on your own
                  webpage
                  >--not unless you get their permission in writing. And believe me, you will
                  get
                  >sued over it, because it is so easy for anyone to have software search
                  agents
                  >(knowbots, spiders, etc.) to continually search the internet looking for
                  >illegal copies of their graphics, words, etc.
                  > We in the library world get constant updates, workshops,
                  seminars,
                  >etc. on the copyright issues -- it's a very big issue for us, and getting
                  >bigger all the time, as more and more stuff gets digitized.
                  >
                  >
                  >> And where do we find the law that renders plagarism
                  >> illegal?
                  >
                  > What else is plagarism but copyright infringement?
                  >
                  > Neil, if you doubt my word, just do some Hotbot or whatever searches
                  on
                  >copyright. There's oodles, and people generally seem to be pretty naive
                  about
                  >it. Our professors, for example, are simply astounded to find that papers
                  that
                  >they wrote, and then had published in a scholarly journal, cannot be put up
                  in
                  >their own websites -- because they gave up the copyright to the journal as
                  >part of the contract to publish. As webmasters, we have to be ultra-careful
                  of
                  >what is allowed on a website. Even a picture of the cover of a book
                  published
                  >by a professor has to go through the process of getting written permission
                  >from the publisher, you can't just copy it from the publisher's website, or
                  >scan it in.
                  > In short, the internet is just one giant press. You wouldn't dream of
                  >taking a copy of the latest Time magazine and printing it up on your own
                  press
                  >and selling it, would you? The exact same laws apply to anything on the
                  >internet, and US law, at least, assumes copyright with or without noitice.
                  >
                  >
                  >--
                  >Harmon Seaver hseaver@...
                  http://harmon.bml.usouthal.edu
                  >=======================================================================
                  >All is impermanent, but this too shall pass away, and the way of the
                  >Samurai is death -- so speak your mind now, or forever hold your peace.
                  >=======================================================================
                  >Copyright, Harmon F. Seaver, 1998. License to distribute this post is
                  >available to Microsoft for US$1,000 per instance, or local equivalent.
                  >=======================================================================
                  >
                  >
                • Jim Shockey
                  ... I can t answer your question from any legal standing. Perhaps it s the same in the UK as it is in the US: Only the court can make that determination, and
                  Message 8 of 22 , Jan 5, 1999
                  • 0 Attachment
                    At 08:59 PM 1/2/99 -0000, Tom Marshall wrote:
                    >I am very interested in the copyright aspects. To help myself, my query is:
                    >if an item is published with an intent that as many people as possible will
                    >read it, and there is no intention to obtain a payment for same, can it be
                    >considered copyright free?
                    >
                    >Tom Marshall
                    >Whitstable UK
                    >Pressman@...


                    I can't answer your question from any legal standing.
                    Perhaps it's the same in the UK as it is in the US:
                    Only the court can make that determination, and only
                    on a case by case basis. I can report to you what I
                    have seen as a standard applied in the area of
                    computerized telecommunications, in the nearly 10
                    years I've been involved with the medium.

                    1) To documents for which the author wishes to retain
                    no rights of ownership, in perpetuity, the author will
                    attach a statement in which the document is placed into
                    the Public Domain. You will have to find the precise
                    language which is required for this placement to be
                    valid and legal.

                    2) To documents which the author wishes to have broad
                    distribution, while still retaining commercial rights
                    of ownership, the author will attach a statement which
                    allows for the unlimited, non-commercial distribution
                    of the document. Again, you will have to determine the
                    correct terminology.

                    3) Beyond this, I believe it is generally considered
                    inappropriate to make any assumptions with regard to
                    the author's intent. Lacking any specific statements
                    by the author (or, copyright owner) to the contrary,
                    I feel one can only assume that all the laws and customs
                    of copyright protection are in full effect.

                    If I am mistaken in any of these conclusions, I would
                    appreciate being shown the factual information.


                    Regards,


                    --Jim <shockey@...> Idaho, USA
                    "All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good
                    men remain silent and do nothing" --Edmund Burke
                  • Paul Anderson
                    ... However, for the internet to be a useful method of information exchange, unless stated otherwise, it must be assumed that anything put on a webpage or sent
                    Message 9 of 22 , Jan 8, 1999
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On Thu, 31 Dec 1998, Harmon Seaver wrote:

                      > And no, publication on the internet absolutely does not make it
                      > public.
                      >
                      However, for the internet to be a useful method of information exchange,
                      unless stated otherwise, it must be assumed that anything put on a webpage
                      or sent in an e-mail is put into the public domain. Anything else would
                      make mailing lists like this one completely useless.

                      > And believe me, you will get
                      > sued over it, because it is so easy for anyone to have software search agents
                      > (knowbots, spiders, etc.) to continually search the internet looking for
                      > illegal copies of their graphics, words, etc.
                      >
                      Do you know the kind of power that takes? Beleive me, this isn't the sort
                      of thing where you download some software on your PC and leaving running
                      all night. First, you'll need three DEC Alpha systems(660MHz, 256 Megs
                      RAM, 50Gig SCSI drive, cost about $10,000 per), an OC3 connection(there's
                      a good $100,000/month), and a staff of 10 people to sort the sites that
                      the Alpha's flag, at a rate of about $7.50/hr per, and custom software
                      development, say another $7,000. And this isn't a system you can just run
                      for a month, no, you have to run it continuously, searching round the
                      clock until the copyright expires, and there's still a very real
                      probability that the document is out there and you never would find it.
                      It's a whole lot more trouble than it's worth. TTYL!



                      ---
                      Paul Anderson - Self-employed Megalomaniac
                      paul@...
                      Member of the Sarnia Linux User's Group
                      http://www.sar-net.com/slug
                      http://zephyr.sellad.on.ca/~paul
                      http://www.freeworldbbs.org
                      There is a multi-legged creature crawling on your shoulder.
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.