Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site asgb.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!hao!asgb!kak
From: kak@asgb.UUCP (Kris A. Kugel)
Newsgroups: net.jokes.d
Subject: Re: Dave Berry Copyrights Flame
Message-ID: <681@asgb.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 15-May-85 11:52:40 EDT
Article-I.D.: asgb.681
Posted: Wed May 15 11:52:40 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 16-May-85 12:43:39 EDT
Expires: Sat, 1-Jun-85 00:00:00 EDT
References: <3026@dartvax.UUCP> <3031@dartvax.UUCP> <591@spp2.UUCP>
Reply-To: kak@asgb.UUCP (Kris A. Kugel)
Distribution: na
Organization: Burroughs Corp. ASG, Boulder Colo.
Lines: 21
Summary: Ethics of quoting

I think I missed the original article that this discussion is
about, so my remarks may be off-base, but here goes anyway...

Any ethical concept needs intelligent application.
As a goal, we want to reward creative effort.
There was a lengthy quote from the book, "Red Sky in Morning",
and I am MORE likely to reward the original author for his
efforts (by buying the book) as a result of seeing the quote.
Posting the quote may therefore end up benefiting the author
rather than causing damage to him.

We must not confuse goals with means.  Creators should be credited
or otherwise rewarded for their good efforts; posting excerpts from
their work is often consistent with this goal.

I also don't see limited numbers of jokes quoted out of books
as damageing, unless the author has specificly created these
jokes.  (How many of you heard the "Foo bird" joke long before
you saw it in print?)  Most jokes cost only the time spent to
read or listen to them, and for a compiler to suddenly "own"
something that he got for free dosn't make sense.