Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!pacbell!att!cuuxb!dlm
From: dlm@cuuxb.ATT.COM (Dennis L. Mumaugh)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: compilation copyright question
Keywords: poster's rights
Message-ID: <2474@cuuxb.ATT.COM>
Date: 10 Feb 89 00:32:10 GMT
References: <5982@leadsv.UUCP>
Reply-To: dlm@cuuxb.UUCP (Dennis L. Mumaugh)
Organization: ATT Data Systems Group, Lisle, Ill.
Lines: 59

In article <5982@leadsv.UUCP> webb@leadsv.UUCP (J.J.  Webb)
writes:

     novice question.

     Suppose I post a poem, program, funny story, etc. and affix
     a copyright statement to it.  Now, comes along a [moderator,
     a compilation guru, a collector, historian, etc.] and
     includes something that I've posted in his/her [joke book,
     poetry collection, history book, etc.] and declares a
     compilation copyright.  She/He starts selling a printed
     version for $9.95 and an electronic version for $8-$9/hr
     connect time.  If he/she didn't get my permission, aren't my
     rights being violated?  Nothing I read, when I first started
     rn_ing, said anything about a moderator (or anybody else)
     "collecting" and compiling information and using it to
     generate revenue (for any reason).

You sue him and collect.  If the material is already copyrighted
one may not compile it without the copyright owner's consent.
Only public domain material are exempt.  That is material for
which the copyright has expired or the author has explicitly
abandoned the copyright.  For example, in the Hofnung
Interplanetary Music Fextival there was a piece {title eludes me}
subtitled "Lets Fake and Opera" and the plot had characters from
all operas and music from all composers except one -- as the
liner notes said, Scarpia could not appear because Puccini still
was under copyright.

Exception to the above: in some countries one must have the words
"All rights reserved." affixed following the copyright notice.

Also a Gilbert and Sullivan operetta was nearly placed in the
public domain because of copyright law.  G&S had to arrange
public performance in the US and Great Britain at the same time
to avoid this.

     novice question 2.

     If this kind of compilation copyright is legitimate, and
     moderators and information collectors are allowed to steal
     people's work, art, etc. on the pretext that "it takes to
     time to compile all this and therefore I should be
     compensated" .. then shouldn't the newuser announcement
     contain a VERY PROMINENT WARNING to that effect?

See above.  Compilation copyright is legal ONLY with the consent
of the authors.  Also NOONE can prohibit the reading of material.
Only the copying of material is prohibited.

Brad can copyright r.h.f but he can't prohibit it from being
read, no matter who.  He also is still held liable for libel and
slander, etc.  Pubication is by definition to the public.  All
Newspapers are copyrighted and they get sued all the time.
Editors must use judgement on columns or get sued.  See the
latest Mike Royko case.
-- 
=Dennis L. Mumaugh
 Lisle, IL       ...!{att,lll-crg}!cuuxb!dlm  OR cuuxb!dlm@arpa.att.com