Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!hao!gatech!mcnc!ece-csc!jnh
From: jnh@ece-csc.UUCP (Joseph Nathan Hall)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Copyright notices (was: Shareware? Hah!)
Message-ID: <3463@ece-csc.UUCP>
Date: 23 Feb 88 23:29:15 GMT
References: <4815@ihlpg.ATT.COM> <3343@killer.UUCP> <2608@gryphon.CTS.COM> <333@esquire.UUCP> <22977@brunix.UUCP> <21023@bbn.COM> <2069@polya.STANFORD.EDU> <28@dcs.UUCP> <20124@bu-cs.BU.EDU>
Reply-To: jnh@ece-csc.UUCP (Joseph Nathan Hall)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC
Lines: 27

*** EAT THIS AND THERE'S MORE BELOW ***

In article <20124@bu-cs.BU.EDU> madd@bu-it.bu.edu (Jim Frost) writes:
>In article <28@dcs.UUCP> wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul) writes:
>>In article <2069@polya.STANFORD.EDU> rwilson@polya.UUCP (Randy Wilson) writes:
...

Well, I suppose you've heard all this by now.  I hope we all agree that
Copyright 1988 by John Q. Doe is valid.

What I understand, though, is that the newer laws give considerable
protection to material WITHOUT copyright notices.  I believe that copyright
notices are only necessary in the event that you want to bring specific
types of legal action against infringing parties.

My curiousity's aroused.  Would someone with some specific legal knowledge
please contribute a lucid description of the way the newer copyright laws
work; in particular, how they apply to computer software.

-joseph

/*
 * What, me worry?  I personally don't care what the vapor pressure of
 * that mercury in the corner is.  In fact I don't even remember when
 * I spilled it.  Maybe it was back before I got the shakes.
 */

*** EAT THIS YOU LINESUCKING PIG ***