Newsgroups: comp.archives.admin
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!ists!newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!oz
From: oz@ursa.ccs.yorku.ca (Ozan Yigit)
Subject: Re: copyright status and future development of comp.archives
In-Reply-To: emv@msen.com's message of Tue, 25 Jun 1991 18: 21:00 GMT
Message-ID: <OZ.91Jun25182112@ursa.ccs.yorku.ca>
Sender: news@newshub.ccs.yorku.ca (USENET News System)
Organization: York U. Communications Research & Development
References: <EMV.91Jun19020107@bronte.aa.ox.com>
	<1991Jun24.001311.11155@newshub.ccs.yorku.ca>
	<1991Jun24.175523.17435@cirrus.com>
	<OZ.91Jun25014110@ursa.ccs.yorku.ca>
	<EMV.91Jun25142055@bronte.aa.ox.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1991 23:21:12 GMT


Ed Vielmetti writes:

   Would your objections be the same if the copyright applied only to the
   entire collection of information posted to comp.archives, and not to
   individual messages?

If you mean another manifestation of said collection of information
outside USENET, as in book form, [done by other moderators from time
to time], or as in another electronic information catalogue/service,
[what you seem to want], I see no reason to object.

   	Now, there is no need to bother even in the US, as per
	Geneva convention, all articles are implicitly copyright by their
	authors.  I think the implications of this for any "derivative
	works such as the article contents of comp.archives is reasonably
	clear.

   I don't think it's clear at all, and I resent your implications that
   comp.archives is just a rebroadcasting service. 

Ed, you resent something I never said or implied. I know moderation is
hard work when you have the articles in front of you, let alone having
to search for them. I also acknowledge that you work hard to add value
to those articles, and exactly because of that comp.archives is as
popular as it is. But, this does not change one fundamental fact about
a given article in comp.archives: you did not write the original, what
you generated and posted is a value-added derivative.
  
   In fact, it's not necessary for me to explicitly
   assert copyrights to the article contents of comp.archives, because
   under the terms which you have just described I already hold an
   implicit copyright.

This is where the term "derivative works" come into play. The original
author's copyright extends to any value-added derivatives under normal
circumstances.

oz