They are hurting me because they have shown that they do not have the
respect for me to ask me first. Furthermore, if their work is of poor
quality, they are hurting me by associating my work with theirs.
>I understand and partly sympathize with the principle of intellectual
>property here, but I fail to see the reason for such frenetic
>argument. In particular, I can't understand your reason for
>maintaining a FAQ in the first place if you're so worried about it
>being distributed other places. Is the point of this work not to
>disseminate information?
Yes, it is. But I'm simply not altruistic enough to say, "Here: I've spent
N hours on this, do as you will with it." Having spent time on it, it
becomes my concern what happens to it.
Call me a control freak :-) I just don't want to be surprised some day by
finding out my FAQ has been printed in something poorly produced. I would
be somewhat less upset to be surprised by seeing it something WELL
produced, but I would still wonder why they hadn't the courtesy to ask me
first.
Intellectual property really is the heart of this matter. Some FAQs are
compiled through community effort; mine is not. The FAQs for my lists and
newsgroup are my work, my creation; 90% or more of the contents are my
original words (I'm hedging here :-) I don't have one up on the screen at
the moment; I'm actually fairly sure that ALL of the contents, except for
the asciigrams of the TREK and B5 logos, respectively, are my work). So, in
the end, I feel it should be my decision where and by what means the
information contained in them is distributed.
Mikey
-- Michael Scott Shappe CIT Collaboration Systems PEM/RIPEM public key available upon request.
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved