forwarded by me becuase Paul's machine wouldn't let him post it directly to the list
gh
--- Begin Message ---
Just a side note to this. I am level I and level II certified in endurance and
sprints/hurdles, as I coach high school cross country and track and field.
Last summer I had a distance runner attend a running camp for a week. When she came
back I talked with her about her experience and I was impressed with her new
terminology and understanding of energy systems and so on. I asked her if I could see
her literature, and it was word for word from the endurance portion of Level I. I was
surprised to see this, but afterward I thought it was a good thing on how much my
athlete had learned.
I won't mention which camp she attended, nor which collegiate coach presented the
material; and though it may be wrong to do I felt it was for a good cause.
In my case I have paid good money to attend these clinics and I don't feel
shortchanged nor cheated that my high school athlete learned something about training
in her sports because now we can communicate better about our daily workouts.
I will also mention too that "Boo" down at LSU has done a phenomenal job either
hosting or presenting his information at these clinics, as have all of the presentors.
The level II material is very in depth and technical in nature, so I also can see why
USATF wants this material copyrighted so people like myself will continue to attend
these clinics.
Please don't be too harsh on USATF about this issue as the individuals that put
together the material work very hard to do so in an attempt to try and educate coaches
like myself about the sport. On the flip side, I too wish that USATF would allow us
to tape certain drills for once we leave. I know this summer I sat on the track
taking as many notes as possible on sprinting drills, when it would have been nice to
videotape everything we were doing because a former distance runner like myself
struggled with these drills and my memory is even worse. :)
Paul Nisius
Grand Rapids/Bigfork, MN
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 01/23/02 01:04PM >>>
disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, so this is a lay-person's opinion, albeit one who works
in the copy area.
It's my understanding that merely by publishing something it falls under the domain of
copyright protection. And it needn't even have the copyright symbol or any such
notification.
HOWEVER, i also believe that before you can seek redress for a copyright infringement
in court you need to formally copyright the piece with the proper office in
Washington, D.C.
I'd *guess* Dunton is in the wrong.
I would also note, however, that copyright belongs to individual authors, not the
publisher, unless rights have been relinquished by the author. As I recall, there was
a significant suit on this recently in which a major newspaper (NY Times?) lost a
battle to reprint stories on its website without paying the original author.
All this of great interest to the general list member, I'm sure.
gh
--- End Message ---
