Nor am I --

> I'm not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV.  The real problem with
> copyright issues with regard to various electronic forums (emial
> lists, Usenet Newsgroups, 'chat' rooms, etc.) is that there is very
> little actual case law that applies to these new methods of
> communication.

Yes, and the reason there isn't is that there's not been any money in it
for anybody.  Lawyers become involved when someone stands to make a buck
and they want a chunk.  All the kinds of text we're talking about don't
make anybody a nickel.  All our agonizing about "copyright" is beside
the point.  We think this is some kind of moral issue -- who "owns" my
words, who "gets credit" for them, etc.  But legally, there's never
going to be a ruling on who owns this text you're reading right now,
because there just ain't any way to make it profitable.  Who _cares_?
Nobody wants to "copy" it and sell it.

It may be logically or theoretically complicated, but it's legally
pretty simple.

> The List-Owner also may claim a 'compilation' copyright on the sum
> total of messages arranged in the particular manner of how the
> messages were posted to the list.

Right.  And who'd challenge it, or suffer from it, or lose money because
she did that?  If she claimed it and I copied my text, or someone
else's, and published it elsewhere, what would she lose?

I can't remember who said -- it wasn't Henry Kissinger, though it's been
attributed to him -- that academic disputes are so vicious because
there's so little at stake.  This is an academic issue.  99% of the
time, there's nothing at stake at all.

                                -- Russ
                              __|~_
Russell A. Hunt          __|~_)_ __)_|~_   Department of English
St. Thomas University    )_ __)_|_)__ __)  PHONE: (506) 452-0424
Fredericton, New Brunswick |  )____) |       FAX: (506) 450-9615
E3B 5G3   CANADA        ___|____|____|____/          [log in to unmask]
                       \                /
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http://www.stu.ca/~hunt/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~