Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!van-bc!rsoft!mindlink!a577
From: a577@mindlink.UUCP (Curt Sampson)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Musing on Constitutionality
Message-ID: <3028@mindlink.UUCP>
Date: 1 Sep 90 17:52:52 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Lines: 24

> spaf@cs.purdue.EDU writes:
> 
> I don't believe that [Clarinet is a "publication"].
> 
> The folks at Clarinet originate nothing new with the material they
> transship (unless things have changed recently).  Nor do they do
> anything to the material of an editorial nature.  All they do is take
> in information from wire services & syndication organisations,
> classify it according to which Clarinet newsgroup and keywords headers
> belong, then ship it out.

I don't think that "publishing" implies presenting anything original.  My
Random House says to publish is "to issue (printed or otherwise reproduced)
textual or graphic material for sale or distribution to the public."
Publishing never implies authorship or originality, and I think that even
classifying items and putting it under different headings qualifies as an
editorial judgement.

If someone simply took the text of a work that is now out of copyright (say, a
Shakespeare play), typeset it, and printed up ten thousand copies, would that
be publishing?  I think it would.  By your definition (not original, no
editing) it wouldn't be.

        -cjs    ( Curt_Sampson@mindlink.UUCP )