Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!seismo!brl-adm!brl-smoke!smoke!chuq@sun.arpa
From: chuq@sun.arpa (Chuq Von Rospach- Lord of the OtherRealms)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re:  Unix dead??? (long message)
Message-ID: <2829@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: Wed, 6-Aug-86 14:57:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-smok.2829
Posted: Wed Aug  6 14:57:13 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 9-Aug-86 05:48:14 EDT
Sender: news@brl-smoke.ARPA
Lines: 47

> There is nothing that irritates me more than pseudo-legal experts who
> make sweeping statements about what the law says when lawyers are much
> more reticent on the issue.

There is nothing that irritates ME more than someone who breaks the law
and tries to bluster their way out of it.  I quote from the SAME issue
of Dec Professional:

	COPYRIGHT 1986 by Professional Press, Inc. All rights reserved.
	No part of this publication may be reproduced  in any form
	without written permission of the publisher.


> A reasonable argument can be made that passing on an editorial from a
> trade publication to various academic and trade distributions for the
> purposes of alerting the individuals in that distribution to the
> opinions expressed in that editorial is protected under the Fair Use
> Doctrine.

Fair Use covers EXCERPTS.  That wasn't, by any sense of the word.  It was
a clear copyright violation.

> I wonder if there is any relation beyond coincidence that both parties
> who flamed about "posting copyrighted material is illegal" are from
> SUN.  Maybe this is a plot by SUN to close off people's brains so they
> will sign any terrible license agreement SUN comes up with.

Mark, besides bordering on the purely slanderous, you're flaming nuts.  It
just happens that there are a couple of people who happen to believe in
following the rules.  I happen to be a writer, and so copyright is an
interest of mine as well as way of life.  The fact that two people from
anywhere mention it should have made you wonder whether there was a basis
in the accusation, not more defensive.

I'm also sorry for passing this to all the mailing lists, but I couldn't
let Marks name calling go uncommented on.  You're wrong Mark, and I don't
care how much you tell, that was a FLAGRANT copyright violation.  It YOU
wrote a piece of software, and I took a copy and gave it away on CompuServe,
you'd scream and yell until the walls fell down.  Why do you think you have
the right to do the same thing to someone else?

This is my last public word on the subject.  Please, folks. don't ignore
copyright.  You can put yourself at legal and financial risk.  You can also
put your home site at risk, as well as the entire network.  It just ain't
worth it.  We ARE NOT ABOVE THE LAW.

chuq