> 1) for-profit
I think that any for profit use of FAQs should generate at least a nominal
payment to support the FAQ activities. This could be done through the
Usenet Foundation. The Foundation was set up to collect royalties on
software created by Usenet people freely or with the Foundation's support.
The PAX archiving software was created with support from the Foundation
(I think) and released for free use. I don't think the Foundation has been
very active recently.
The last time I checked with Brian Reid (reid@decwrl.DEC.COM) the
Foundation didn't have any money. Maybe this could be an appropriate
vehicle to look out for the interests of FAQ maintainers. As has been
previously stated, there is not much chance any one of us will sue
an infringer, even an extremely blatant one. However, if the Foundation
could represent all maintainers, then it might have enough clout to
get some respect, and, if not, hire a lawyer :-).
Also, there is the problem of FAQ maintainers that become unreachable,
making it impossible for anybody to use their FAQs, because of copyright
restrictions (not to mention the FAQs not being kept up to date.)
One of the major impediments to the use of scientific work is the
inability to reach authors of copyrighted work, and the scientific
publication system has a pretty good infrastructure for handling these
problems.
I would be willing to let the Foundation take over the copyright of
my FAQ, in case I became unreachable. They could collect the money,
sue the infringers, hire somebody to keep it up to date until such
time as I reappeared, etc. (OK, I am dreaming, but with enough maintainers
doing this, it might really work -- eventually).
To do this right, we have to find out if the Usenet Foundation is
willing to do this, ask some legal talent available on the net to
draw up a standard agreement and see that everybody gets a copy, etc.
I could do this, but I think somebody more central to the FAQ system
ought to take the job. Anyway, if I do it, it will take a long time.
(The Internet Society might be willing to do this, since it is already
in the publishing business to some extent. On the other hand,
a Foundation might be a better legal structure.)
David S. Stodolsky, PhD Internet: stodolsk@andromeda.rutgers.edu
Peder Lykkes Vej 8, 4 tv. : david@arch.ping.dk
DK-2300 Copenhagen S Tel.: + 45 32 97 66 74
Denmark Voice + Fax: + 45 31 59 76 44
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved