Robert:
If my memory serves me, Mr. Hanard used to a be a
contributor on this list. In the last year or so
(maybe the last two years?) he has decided to just
copy this list on his responses to discussions in some
other forum.
I guess he thinks we are interested in his discussions
when they touch on copyright.
But, I think he believes that he is above actually
monitoring this list, or participating on this list.
If you really want to enter into a debate with him you
will have to respond directly to him or find the
original forum of the debate.
But, do not expect him to be influenced by your logic.
You will have better luck changing sterling's position
than Mr. Hanard's.
So, when he doesn't respond to this post, remember: he
is not ignoring you or your post; he is ignoring all
of us on this list.
Best regards,
Keith
PS: Even when he contributed, his only interest was in
"academic self archiving," which is really more of a
contractual issue between publishers and writers than
a copyright issue.
- "Robert F. Bodi" <lawlists[_at_]bodi.com> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Stevan Harnad" <harnad[_at_]ecs.soton.ac.uk>
> To: "CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual
> Property"
> <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>
> Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 11:11 AM
> Subject: [CNI-(C)] Re: On the Need to Take Both
> Roads to Open Access
>
> > But -- and this is absolutely critical if we are
> to understand free
> > online full-text access in the PostGutenberg Age
> correctly: My making
> > my own full-text freely accessible online means
> *anyone* worldwide who has
> > access to the web may (i) retrieve my full-text
> online, (ii) read it
> > on-screen, (iii) download it, (iv) save it, (v)
> print it off, (vi) do
> > online or offline computations on it. In addition,
> the software agents
> > (e.g. google) that I choose to empower to do so
> (and, by default, this
> > could be all of them) can, like individuals, (vii)
> harvest my text,
> > invert it, index it, perhaps perform further
> computations on it.
> >
> > This is not even a legal fact, it is a practical,
> technological and
> > inevitable fact about free, full-text web access
> and the nature of
> > computers and the internet (and of files that are
> not fire-walled by a
> > password or encryption or agent-blocker). If a law
> allows us to walk
> > inside a building, a separate law is not needed to
> say we may breathe the
> > air in the building; nor is a law that says we may
> walk but not breathe
> > enforceable -- except in a sci-fi scenario that is
> not worth our wasting
> > our time even contemplating, either in the case of
> walk-but-don't-breathe
> > or read-but-don't-download-or-compute.
>
> Although you are correct about the technical aspects
> of the WWW, your legal
> conclusions do not necessarily follow, and your
> analogy is not good. If a
> law allows you to walk into a building, that does
> NOT imply that you can
> open file cabinets, use computers, take sodas from
> refrigerators, etc. that
> are in that building. Similarly, the law is not yet
> settled on all of the
> copyright implications of technology. The fact that
> certain things need to
> happen to make the WWW work well is NOT to say that
> they are legally allowed
> without restriction. Case law seems to be heading
> in that direction, but we
> are NOT yet fully there.
>
> For example, just because a paper is available
> online does NOT legally imply
> that you can print it, or save it on your computer.
> At least, I have yet to
> find any court that says so. However, there is a
> strong argument and cases
> have found that, if publicly viewable, you at least
> have the right to do so,
> and likely also the right to link to the paper. But
> printing and
> downloading (e.g., saving) the paper is a different
> story, and is a
> questionable practice in my opinion. For that,
> explicit permission by the
> copyright holder would be useful.
>
> -Bodi
>
>
>
#############################################################
> This message is sent to you because you are
> subscribed to
> the mailing list <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>.
> To unsubscribe, E-mail to:
> <CNI-COPYRIGHT-off[_at_]cni.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to
> <CNI-COPYRIGHT-digest[_at_]cni.org>
> To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to
> <CNI-COPYRIGHT-index[_at_]cni.org>
> To postpone your subscription, E-mail to
> <CNI-COPYRIGHT-null[_at_]cni.org>
> Send administrative queries to
> <CNI-COPYRIGHT-request[_at_]cni.org>
>
> Visit the CNI-COPYRIGHT e-mail list archive at
<https://mail2.cni.org/Lists/CNI-COPYRIGHT/>.
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com
Received on Fri Oct 10 2003 - 00:05:01 GMT