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/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~