-Caveat Lector- I was always under the impression that information for *educational* purposes (extended in the case of a "list" to non-commercial information and reference) was not affected by copyright laws. It would seem if I bought a newspaper for $1.00 and took said item and passed it around to many other people, the newspaper generating organ would suffer accordingly (by $1.00 a pop). Similarly, by donating magazines to the Salvation Army for their resale (again non-profit) would affect the magazine publisher (who sells back issues). These situations would be much worse if I just snipped out articles without benefit of the remainder of the medium from which they came, complete with copyright information. Having thought about this in the past, I reflected on those who do not have access to the I-Net (e-mail only). There would be NO WAY for them to access news stories or articles which might be under discussion (again, discussion that is for free, no charge, gratis) and the comparison to the exchange and banter (by the 'browser enabled' would be limited to the Russell, KS, Reporter (or whatever they call their newspaper) to compare to those other news media that may have a differing number of details and emphasis. Considering the number of sources available, there is the distinct possibility that some may be accessed much more frequently to the exclusion of others that may be as good if not better -- if not in content, then by virtue of their perspective. It is to the advantage, therefore, for readers to assist in the distribution of the lesser knowns to ensure their point of view is known (A) and (B) to ensure they can compete more equally with the larger, more frequently accessed media. In a sense, with all innocence, innocent of revenue motivation, this becomes a kind of public service -- akin to hawking the news for free. I always make sure the source is identified, the c-right information is posted, and the main site can be easily linked (browser brand notwithstanding) for reference and increased circulation. Realising the writers and editors of pieces construct the parts of their articles to have varying degrees of effect and importance, depending on where one is in the article, I would consider it an insult to cut and paste only some portions of each, as reference, insulting not only to the correspondent but to the actual owner(s) of the intellectual property. In short, I'm not trying to steal anything -- if anything at all, the primary purpose is to make sure those with whom I correspond have a reasonable expectation of FACT and the means to check, compare, refute said FACT. For those sources that would object to this, I might conclude they don't want people reading their stuff (exclusivity) (A), (B) their stuff may be suspect (not worth reading), (C) they are trying to retain some measure of anonymity (don't care about success of their efforts), and (D) they're trying to maximise their revenue under any circumstances available (which they can do anyway)(NY Times is on the way). I am not affiliated with the legal community. But for those who want to read dome opinion on copyright, the following link should be of interest and assisitance: Linked from http://jurist.evansville.edu/search.cgi?q=copyright&t=o From http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/courseware/cohen-j/ucc2b498.html Copyright and The Jurisprudence of Self-Help (paper presented at the Berkeley Center for Law & Technology's conference, Intellectual Property Law and Contract in the Information Age: The Impact of Article 2B of the Uniform Commercial Code on the Future of Transactions in Information and Electronic Commerce, April 25, 1998) **Draft -- Please do not cite or quote without permission. Julie E. Cohen(*) Introduction I. Electronic Fencing and Self-Help Under Article 2B II. Doctrine: Self-Help, Trespass, and the Rights of Persons III. Theory: Consent, Efficiency, and Norms IV. The UCC, Copyright, and the Public-Private Distinction V. Restoring the Balance: The Case for Licensee Self-Help VI. Conclusion Notes A new wind is blowing in copyright law. For centuries, authors and their assignees have relied primarily on federal copyright law to define and protect their legal rights. Suddenly, that may be about to change. New developments in digital technology offer copyright owners the tantalizing possibility of absolute control of their creative and informational content, even after its delivery to end users, via self-executing digital contracts. Copyright owners, along with purveyors of other (noncopyrightable) informational content, envision using these contracts to secure -- and redefine -- their "informational property rights."(1) Within this vision of private ordering and technological self-help, contract law rather than copyright law is paramount. Limits on information ownership set by the public law of copyright are conceived as optional restrictions that can be avoided using appropriate contractual language. ~~~~~~~~~~~~ A<>E<>R The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
