Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site u1100a.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!u1100a!sdo
From: sdo@u1100a.UUCP (Scott Orshan)
Newsgroups: net.jokes.d
Subject: Re: Guide to males - copyright violations
Message-ID: <680@u1100a.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 17-May-84 09:56:26 EDT
Article-I.D.: u1100a.680
Posted: Thu May 17 09:56:26 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 18-May-84 02:09:56 EDT
References: <752@ucbvax.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Communications Research, Piscataway, NJ
Lines: 38

Well, I am stunned.  Here is the background:

There were two postings of excerpts from the new book
"The Field Guide to North American Males."  (About 300 lines worth)
I ignored it the first time, but when I saw it the second time
I had to complain. (<669@u1100a.UUCP> - net.jokes,net.jokes.d)
This seems to me to be a clear violation of the copyright laws.
Here are the responses I got.  They are not direct quotes as I
didn't save the mail:

"I wouldn't have bought it anyway, so it doesn't matter."

"It was just a review.  Maybe a little too long, but within the
bounds of legality."

"Go in a corner and die. [that was a direct quote]  Keep your
comments out of net.jokes."

"Nothing should appear in both net.jokes and net.jokes.d."

"The author should pay the poster of the article for advertising."

"Oh don't be stupid. ...nobody buys books like that anyway.
They just read them in bookstores."

I'm perfectly aware of the proper usage of net.jokes and net.jokes.d.
It's just that, when my site is involved in the propagation of
such stolen material, I feel it is necessary to comment where many
people will see it.  What amazes me most is that nobody else
noticed the violation.  With all the discussion of software
piracy, and lyric posting in net.music, I would have thought that
someone else would have complained as well.

I guess I was wrong.  I will say no more.

		Scott Orshan
		Bell Communications Research
		{ihnp4,abnjh,pyuxww}!u1100a!sdo