Re: Web Archive of Mailing List
Peter Krakau (ils@legalethics.com)
Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:09:40 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:09:40 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199606111809.OAA09842@foyer.homecom.com>
From: Peter Krakaur<ils@legalethics.com>
Subject: Re: Web Archive of Mailing List
At 12:25 PM 6/11/96, Alfonso C. Fuller, Jr. wrote:
* Peter:
*
* It seems to me that we may be focusing on the wrong part of copyright law,
* which says that the author has the copyright whenever a new writing is fixed
* in a tangible medium [such as the hard drive of your computer]. Therefore,
* you automatically have copyright in your e-mail. [Even without a copyright
* 'notice'.]
*
* The question, then, is not whether you have the rights, but whether you
* are also simultaenously giving up those rights if you don't do something to
* preserve them when you send e-mail to a forum which is likley to lead to
* uncontrolled re-publication of the work.
*
* I hate to be the one to suggest more rules, but perhaps list moderators
* should be getting permissions if archiving is desired. Obviously, blanket
* permissions would [will?] be easier to administer, but I wonder what effect
* it would have on the process..... Al Fuller.
As Samuel Lewis noted, there was a discussion in this in cyberia-l a while
back when Mr. Hardy proposed a way to deal with copyright issues and
archives of messages (search Legal Domain Network or look at cyberia
archives there). I do not question when copyright rights are created and
agree the issue is what happens to various rights when messages are sent to
a list service (or for that matter to a newsgroup).
I tend to shy away from new regulations whenever possible. I think it is a
good idea for list service owners to evaluate how they want to handle the
issue and state a clear policy. For example, there could be a policy that
any individual posting a message to a list service agrees that the list
service owner may distribute the messages as long as no fee is charged,
etc. That way, if any individual does not wish to have his/her messages
distributed, he/she does not have to post the message. My feeling is that
if one wants to particpate in an open discussion, one should expect that
he/she cannot come back later and say that he/she had all rights to the
discussion (gross generalization here). One gets into fair use, and other
issues that would be better left to the practice or a law school exam and
not an open discussion.
I think you'll find that trying to come up with new rules here is something
other discussions have tried to tackle in various forms. I am not aware of
any particular policy that has been adopted, but the list owner might want
to contact Mr. Hardy of the cyberia-l to get a heads up on what has been
done on this issue. My guess is that if we try to put togehter a policy
here, we will never end up talking about ethics, which is what this list is
about anyway, isn't it?
By the way, if you haven't seen it yet, the Florida Bar is on line and
offers ethics opinions, a checklist for Web Page Set advertising, ethics
rules, and other info. I forget the domain name (something like
flabar.org), but you can get em at www.legalethics.com/states/fl.htm.
_______________________________________________________________________
This e-mail communication is not intended as and should not be interpreted
as legal advice or a legal opinion. The transmission of this e-mail
communication does not create an attorney-client relationship between the
sender and you. Do not act or rely upon the information in this
communication without seeking the advice of an attorney.
Peter Krakaur Internet Legal Services ils@legalethics.com
<http://www.legalethics.com/> <http://www.legalethics.com/pa/main.html>
_______________________________________________________________
College Hill Internet Consultants || 382 Benefit St. Suite 3
Full Service Web Design For || Providence, RI 02903
Legal & Business Professionals || VOICE: (401) 454-3553
E-Mail: home@collegehill.com |||| FAX: (401)-454-1925
WWW: http://www.collegehill.com |||||||