RE: [dvd-discuss] Hang the RIAA in their own noose.

[Michael.A.Rolenz(at)aero.org]

Rather than say you loose protection, the work enters the public domain 
and noone else can claim copyright protection for it.




Noah silva <nsilva@atari-source.com>
Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
10/18/01 10:25 AM
Please respond to dvd-discuss

 
        To:     "'dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu'" <dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>
        cc: 
        Subject:        RE: [dvd-discuss] Hang the RIAA in their own noose.


> > > would have to ask permission.
> > 
> > Except that if the web archive is considered public, then you are
> > knowingly posting to a public place, so I think the times 
> > copying it is
> > just taking a public document and distributing it.
> > 
> > (and at any rate, I certainly wouldn't post top-secret info 
> > to this list).
> > 
> 
> The Weekly Reader in San Diego is a newspaper that is 
> distributed for free.  So you are saying that any other
> publication can just lift articles from it and reprint
> them w/o permission because it was free?
> 
> Copyright doesn't work that way.
> 

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. 

 -- noah silva