Indeed. No trees will die needlessly, and you'll get a free CD of
useful documents. (I'm planning to stick ours on a machine in the
office and use it as a quick reference resource for RFCs.) And unlike
the last scheme to be floated here, they're not even trying to grab
your copyright on the document.
Yes, they should have asked. But I don't see that lawyers are called
for. Perhaps that's because I'm not American :-p
>And further, if you didn't explicitly say "Distribute only via FTP on
>the Internet" or "Do not distribute on CD-ROM", you got what you
>deserve. When I put together the Packet Driver CD, all I did was to
>check every file for copyright permissions. Only one author had an
>explicit statement.
Well, as previously mentioned on this mailing list, my FAQs have an
explicit statement encouraging people to indulge in wholesale
duplication of the documents. But you seem to be assuming that we're
talking about US law, where it makes a difference whether you have a
copyright statement. We're not. Walnut Creek could be sued by FAQ
authors in the UK, France, Germany...
mathew
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved