In article <[log in to unmask]>, "LISTSERV list
owners' forum" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
 
>      The information contained in Brad Templeton's
> article on the URL cited below contradicts your observation that
> a copyright must be added to each individual message.
 
   I don't think Eric is stating that if each message in a digest doesn't
have a copyright notice, the article isn't copyrighted. Copyright
notifications *do* have a purpose and many users of LISTSERV (and L-Soft
client, I presume) *do* want their works to have such a notice. You
omitted the following paragraph from the material you quoted from
<URL:http://www.clari.net/brad/copymyths.html> which explains this:
 
   It is true that a notice strengthens the protection, by warning people,
   and by allowing one to get more and different damages, but it is not
   necessary. If it looks copyrighted, you should assume it is. This applies
   to pictures, too. You may not scan pictures from magazines and post
   them to the net, and if you come upon something unknown, you shouldn't
   post that either.
 
Thus, one should not read the document identified above URL and conclude
that copyright notifications are useless or that to some people, who
publish via electronic medium, they are determined to be a necessity.
 
--dwb--
 
David W. Baker | [log in to unmask] | <URL:http://www.netspace.org/users/dwb/>