> >>>>> "Henry" == Henry van Cleef <vancleef@bga.com> writes:
> Henry> pursuing this with the idea of getting some redress from the courts has
> Henry> to begin with the notion that the author(s) have been somehow damaged,
> Henry> either in reputation or financially (or both) by the actions of the
>
> Not true under Finnish law and probably under Berne convention
> (although I haven't read it - is it online somewhere?).
<gopher://gopher.law.cornell.edu/00/foreign/fletcher/BH006-1971.txt>. The
Berne Convention and many other useful intellectual property resources are
also available at <http://www.questel.orbit.com/patents/readings.html>.
> Copyright
> grants you the exclusive right to allow publication of your work.
> Whether or not you want money out of it is not a consideration.
Of course. But if the only punishment for the offender is payment of
court costs, would *you* invest several years of your life pursuing a
lawsuit -- even if you were sure you would win? I wouldn't, unless all
the FAQ maintainers in the world were willing to file individual lawsuits
in hopes of inflicting the death of a thousand cuts. :-)
Since FAQs are free by another channel, making an argument for damages is
difficult. Antti's idea (different post) sounds like a step toward fixing
that problem. Putting a determinate monetary value on FAQs in the medium
at issue (books, CD-ROMs) might make it easier to make a case for damages.
That is a purely legal question, which only a qualified lawyer would be
able to answer; and the answer might be different in common-law and
statute-law countries, as Kalle seems to be suggesting.
john
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved