The people who put out the SIMTEL archive CDROMS are reputed to
be meticulous about asking permission of the authors of the
software that goes on the CDROM. Why can't Walnut Creek do the
same?
Copyright is not synonymous with personal profit. I maintain the
copyright to my FAQ, and I am very generous with my permission to
others to use it in various ways that benefit them, arguably at my
expense. It seems only fair to me that my right to give permission
be respected, especially when I make it very clear that I do give
broad permission.
I hear a lot of people, including some FAQ maintainers, railing
against the principle of copyright as though it were somehow
contrary to the principles of community service and community
property. Copyright laws are in large part a codification of
generally accepted ethical standards of practice. As such, the
person who violates another's copyrights also violates social
convention. When the material in question is already a sort of
community property, and has no protection other than that given
by virtue of ethical standards and (unweildy, expensive) law,
such as is the case with Usenet documents, the offense is even
greater.
Una Smith smith-una@yale.edu
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved