Re: The letter is way off base...

---------

Rich Kulawiec (rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu)
Wed, 14 Dec 1994 23:37:41 -0500 (EST)


>As far as I can tell, everybody agrees that the very act of posting
>allows any copying that is "standard usenet and internet usage", no
>matter what the license says. What walnut creek is doing qualifies as
>standard usenet & internet usage. You've waived your right to control
>this type of thing by the very act of posting your FAQs.

I've waived no rights whatsoever -- in fact, the more I read about this,
the more interested I'm becoming in investing real money to see that
my rights are protected to the fullest extent possible. I spent $4.5K
so far this year to buy a workstation for my home in order to maintain
and update my FAQs, and run my mailing lists; I'll probably spend
another $2K before the year is over. And that doesn't count many, many
hours of my time, which is time that I don't spend making real $$.
I don't begrudge this -- I wouldn't have been involved in 'net activities
for all these years if I did. But if someone *else* is making money
from my work, in violation of my copyright and without my consent, I'm
inclined to ask my lawyer to find out how deep their corporate and personal
pockets really are.

I haven't done that yet, because, as I've said, I'm not inclined toward
litigation as long as there are other ways to resolve problems and
settle differences. And this ongoing discussion suggests that these
"other ways" may still exist...so I'm listening, and participating.

But don't think for a moment that this issue will go away -- the FAQs
are, for better or worse, the single best source of information available
on/about Usenet, and the abuses will probably only get worse...until we
do something to stop it.

---Rsk



[ Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive | Search Mail Archive | Authors | Usenet ]
[ 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 ]

---------

faq-admin@landfield.com

© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved