[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [dvd-discuss] Hang the RIAA in their own noose.
- To: "'dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu'" <dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu>
- Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Hang the RIAA in their own noose.
- From: Jeme A Brelin <jeme(at)brelin.net>
- Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 11:54:57 -0700 (PDT)
- In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0110181322340.17165-100000@sparcy.internal.lan>
- Reply-To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
On Thu, 18 Oct 2001, Noah silva wrote:
> There's a big different though. The paper is "free" financially, but
> probably not copyright wise. I would be willing to bet they put up
> copyright notices on the paper.
>
> Your post, published on a mailing list, likely isn't considered
> protected. By definition, when you post something to the public without
> attaching a copyright notice, you lose protection. You know the list is
> available to the public through the web archives. I would say google
> Groups has no problem archiving millions of usenet conversations for this
> very reason.
Unfortunately, in order to comply with the Berne Convention, it is no
longer required to make any claim of copyright in order to be protected by
copyright.
Just another way we've hung ourselves.
J.
--
-----------------
Jeme A Brelin
jeme@brelin.net
-----------------
[cc] counter-copyright
http://www.openlaw.org