Philo wrote:
 
> If the list is a "public list" (apply your own definition here), then I
> think a fair argument could be made that all posts were made in a public
> forum, strengthening the fair use defense.
>
> If it were me, I'd still try to get permission from the authors. If the
> material isn't inflammatory, I'd definitely attribute the stuff...
 
I definitely would get permission from the authors.  If someone writes an
article in, say, the Washington Post, said article is also published in a
public forum -- that does *not* imply that there is no copyright.
 
People who post messages on the Internet are not explicitly stating in those
messages that they consider themselves copyright holders -- and many, perhaps
even most, haven't even thought about such issues, and many might not
particularly mind if their material is used even without their permission.  I
can't see how that would make a difference, however: the author of any
original piece of writing is ipso facto the copyright holder of that piece of
writing unless (s)he is writing it for a company or other entity that (who)
will be assigning the copyright to itself, or for the U. S. Government.  I
can't quite see what the public quality of the forum has to do with it, and
the ease with which someone's work can be extracted and disseminated in an
electronic medium really doesn't legalize a breach of copyright.
 
Better safe (and fair) than sorry.  Quote from the different messages, that IS
fair use, but ...
 
Mario Rups
[log in to unmask]