RE: Re: Attribution

>>Corporations are not the only ones who have great interest in
>>copyright extension. Many artists and authors have the same
>>interest.

Of course, they do. It's their income. It pays their bills. It's what they have to leave to their children. Are you suggesting artists don't have the right to live like normal people because their contributions to society--making ideas into tangible creations--are so great? Their contributions must be great or it would be pointless to say that everyone should be able to claim them as their own. If they were worthless, no one would care.

>>Why do you think that not providing attribution is sloppy?
>>You really overlooked the practical issues in providing
>>attribution. Is it feasible to provide 300 pages of
>>attributions for a 100-page report?

I'm a lawyer and a scholar. I provide attribution all the time. It's not hard. Where are you getting the notion that a 100 page report needs 300 attributions? But supposing it does. If it's too hard, then don't write it. Apart from the fairness, honor, and decency issues, work without attributions is less authoritative.

-----Original Message-----
From: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property [mailto:CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org]On Behalf Of Joseph Pietro Riolo Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 3:43 PM
To: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property Subject: [CNI-(C)] Re: Attribution is not required in public domain materials Received on Fri Jun 27 2003 - 22:27:16 GMT