Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!ccplumb
From: ccplumb@watnot.UUCP
Newsgroups: news.stargate
Subject: Re: Article Copyrights
Message-ID: <12839@watnot.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 10-Apr-87 12:39:28 EST
Article-I.D.: watnot.12839
Posted: Fri Apr 10 12:39:28 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 11-Apr-87 14:45:56 EST
References: <8704100648.AA08480@ingres.Berkeley.EDU>
Reply-To: ccplumb@watnot.UUCP (Colin Plumb)
Organization: U. of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 23

In article <8704100648.AA08480@ingres.Berkeley.EDU> hatcher@INGRES.BERKELEY.EDU (Doug Merritt) writes:
>The scare about stargate redistribution prohibitions has had an unfortunate
>side effect...a lot of people are now putting needlessly restrictive
>copyright notices on all their postings. Often the wording is so restrictive
>that, for instance, a magazine, journal, book or other publication would
>not be able to quote the material. I doubt that this is intended, so I
>suggest you think about making sure that general use is allowed. Why not?
>Look at Byte's listings of interesting BIX material; if all those people
>put restrictive copyright notices in there, the only effect would be that
>their postings would reach a smaller audience. This benefits no one.

All of the notices I've seen have said only `you may redistribute this
posting only if your recipients can', or `redistribution rights granted
recursively only.'  BYTE could publish such postings.  The only thing is
that I could run off 100,000 copies of the postings and spread them
around without asking BYTE for permission.

This doesn't seem too restrictive.
--
	-Colin Plumb (watmath!watnot!ccplumb)

Silly quote:
Nobody could fill his socks.