Pat Berry responded:
> I disagree completely. Please explain why you think this is so.
Of course, you have an implicit copyright unless you explicitly waive
it. However, by posting to the net, you're basically giving people
free license to copy the daylights out of your document. Not being a
lawyer, I can't speak for the legality of trying to restrict this by
writing your own custom license at the top of the file. You don't
have the luxury of a shrink-wrap agreement. However, Berkeley beat
USL on this, but they had contractual agreements. A real lawyer
would have do a more thorough analysis.
Legalities aside, you shouldn't *want* to assert ownership over
documents you post. Think of all the people who post various software
to the net. Nothing legal stops you from enhancing it and releasing a
newer version, possibly under a different name. Common courtesy requires
you to consult the original author first.
So, if somebody "steals" your document, don't call them a "thief", call
them "rude".
Now, if you feel the desire to take my FAQ, hack it into a book, and
not give me any credit, that's plagarism. We've got laws to deal with
that. If all you do is take a collection of FAQ's down to the local
copy store and make 100 bound copies, then sell them as a course
reader (where the store is likely marking up by more than just
cost-of-materials), why should I care? More eyes see my document.
That's what matters to me.
-- Dan Wallach // dwallach@cs.princeton.edu // Phone#: 609-683-4673 http://www.cs.princeton.edu/grad/dwallach/
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved