| Subject | Author | Date |
| RE: Re: Compilation of video scenes onto DVD | Eric Von Vorys | Friday, 27 February |
| RE: Re: The Grey Album | Agenbroad, James (Civ,ARL/CISD) | Friday, 27 February |
| Re: Re: H.R. 3261? -- Fine! But don't call them "facts" | David Dailey | Friday, 27 February |
| Re: Re: H.R. 3261? -- Fine! But don't call them "facts" | Robert F. Bodi | Friday, 27 February |
| Re: Re: H.R. 3261? -- Fine! But don't call them "facts" | Frederick Emrich, Editor, info-commons.org | Friday, 27 February |
| Re: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | Bob Warner | Friday, 27 February |
| Course Announcement: Digital Licensing Online | Kim Nayyer | Friday, 27 February |
| RE: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | Harold Federow | Friday, 27 February |
| Re: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | Robert F. Bodi | Friday, 27 February |
| Re: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | Robert F. Bodi | Friday, 27 February |
| Re: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | Robert F. Bodi | Friday, 27 February |
| Re: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | Keith Tabor | Friday, 27 February |
| RE: Re: The Grey Album | Mike Bradley | Friday, 27 February |
| Re: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | Keith Tabor | Friday, 27 February |
| Re: Re: H.R. 3261? -- Fine! But don't call them "facts" | Keith Tabor | Friday, 27 February |
| RE: Re: Compilation of video scenes onto DVD | John Mitchell | Friday, 27 February |
| Re: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | sstouden[_at_]thelinks.com | Friday, 27 February |
| Re: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | sstouden[_at_]thelinks.com | Friday, 27 February |
| Re: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | Robert F. Bodi | Friday, 27 February |
| RE: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | John Mitchell | Thursday, 26 February |
| RE: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | John Mitchell | Thursday, 26 February |
| RE: Re: The Grey Album | DeMarte, Luke | Thursday, 26 February |
| Re: the law IS what the law IS. | Steven Jamar | Thursday, 26 February |
| Re: the law IS what the law IS. | Kevin Grierson | Thursday, 26 February |
| Re: Re: Decompiler service - should I seek legal advice? | Robert F. Bodi | Thursday, 26 February |
| RE: Re: Decompiler service - Object code IS "protected" by copyright law | Ethan Ackerman | Thursday, 26 February |
| Re: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | Robert F. Bodi | Thursday, 26 February |
| Re: Re: Compilation of video scenes onto DVD | Brock Shinen, Esq. | Thursday, 26 February |
| Re: Re: legal speculation-purpose for legal listservs | Robert F. Bodi | Thursday, 26 February |
| RE: Re: Compilation of video scenes onto DVD | Conlon, Julie | Thursday, 26 February |
| Re: Re: H.R. 3261? -- Fine! But don't call them "facts" | Robert F. Bodi | Thursday, 26 February |
| RE: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | 'Timothy Arnold-Moore' | Thursday, 26 February |
| Re: Re: permission for screen shots | John Levine | Thursday, 26 February |
| RE: Re: Decompiler service - should I seek legal advice? | I.R.Maturana | Thursday, 26 February |
| Re: The Grey Album | Theodora Michaels | Thursday, 26 February |
| Re: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | Bob Warner | Thursday, 26 February |
| Re: Re: Peter Pan. | Ohad Mayblum | Wednesday, 25 February |
| Re: Re: H.R. 3261? -- Fine! But don't call them "facts" | Malla Pollack | Wednesday, 25 February |
| Re: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | Robert F. Bodi | Wednesday, 25 February |
| Re: Re: Decompiler service - should I seek legal advice? | Keith Tabor | Wednesday, 25 February |
| Re: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | Keith Tabor | Wednesday, 25 February |
| Re: Re: legal speculation-purpose for legal listservs | Roy Murphy | Wednesday, 25 February |
| Re: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | sstouden[_at_]thelinks.com | Wednesday, 25 February |
| RE: Re: Compilation of video scenes onto DVD | Eric Von Vorys | Wednesday, 25 February |
| The Grey Album | Nick Zales | Wednesday, 25 February |
| Re: The law is interpreted | Robert F. Bodi | Wednesday, 25 February |
| The law is interpreted | Herb Coleman | Tuesday, 24 February |
| Re: Compilation of video scenes onto DVD | Brock Shinen, Esq. | Tuesday, 24 February |
| Re: Re: 321 Studios | Kathleen Williamson | Tuesday, 24 February |
| RE: Re: Decompiler service - should I seek legal advice? | Ethan Ackerman | Tuesday, 24 February |
| Re: Re: Decompiler service - should I seek legal advice? | Robert F. Bodi | Tuesday, 24 February |
| Re: Re: the law IS what the law IS | Robert F. Bodi | Tuesday, 24 February |
| Re: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | Bob Warner | Tuesday, 24 February |
| Re: Re: what about this? a lawsuit? | Robert F. Bodi | Tuesday, 24 February |
| RE: Peter Pan. | Agenbroad, James (Civ,ARL/CISD) | Tuesday, 24 February |
| Re: H.R. 3261? -- Fine! But don't call them "facts" | David Dailey | Tuesday, 24 February |
| Re: 321 Studios | Malla Pollack | Tuesday, 24 February |
| RE: 321 Studios | John Mitchell | Tuesday, 24 February |
| RE: Re: what about this? a lawsuit? | John Mitchell | Tuesday, 24 February |
| Re: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | Robert F. Bodi | Tuesday, 24 February |
| Re: the law IS what the law IS | Steven Jamar | Tuesday, 24 February |
| RE: 321 Studios | Scott Warner | Tuesday, 24 February |
| Re: Re: Decompiler service - should I seek legal advice? | Gregory Aharonian | Tuesday, 24 February |
| Re: 321 Studios | Doug Isenberg | Tuesday, 24 February |
| Re: 321 Studios | Maureen Cohen Harrington | Tuesday, 24 February |
| RE: Re: legal speculation-purpose for legal listservs | Agenbroad, James (Civ,ARL/CISD) | Tuesday, 24 February |
| RE: Re: the law IS what the law IS. | Agenbroad, James (Civ,ARL/CISD) | Monday, 23 February |
| 321 Studios | jnoble[_at_]dgsys.com | Monday, 23 February |
| Re: Re: legal speculation-purpose for legal listservs was Re: permission for screen shots | Robert F. Bodi | Monday, 23 February |
| Re: Re: permission for screen shots | Robert F. Bodi | Monday, 23 February |
| Re: Re: legal speculation-purpose for legal listservs | Robert F. Bodi | Monday, 23 February |
| Re: Re: what about this? a lawsuit? | Robert F. Bodi | Monday, 23 February |
| Re: Re: what about this? a lawsuit? | Robert F. Bodi | Monday, 23 February |
| Re: what about this? a lawsuit? | Nick Zales | Monday, 23 February |
| RE: Re: what about this? a lawsuit? | John Mitchell | Monday, 23 February |
| Re: brown v board | Steven Jamar | Monday, 23 February |
| Re: Re: what about this? a lawsuit? | sstouden[_at_]thelinks.com | Monday, 23 February |
| Re: Re: legal speculation-purpose for legal listservs was Re: permission for screen shots | sstouden[_at_]thelinks.com | Monday, 23 February |
| Publishing Catalog | Brock Shinen, Esq. | Monday, 23 February |
| Re: Re: legal speculation-purpose for legal listservs | Mike Holderness | Monday, 23 February |
| RE: Re: Decompiler service - should I seek legal advice? | I.R.Maturana | Monday, 23 February |
| Re: Re: permission for screen shots | John Levine | Monday, 23 February |
| Compilation of video scenes onto DVD | Conlon, Julie | Monday, 23 February |
| RE: H.R. 3261? | Lee, Dan | Friday, 20 February |
| RE: Re: legal speculation-purpose for legal listservs was Re: permission for screen shots | John Mitchell | Friday, 20 February |
| Re: Re: what about this? a lawsuit? | Robert F. Bodi | Friday, 20 February |
| Re: legal speculation-purpose for legal listservs was Re: permission for screen | Steven Jamar | Friday, 20 February |
| RE: what about this? a lawsuit? | me | Friday, 20 February |
| H.R. 3261? | urbanek | Friday, 20 February |
| RE: Re: legal speculation-purpose for legal listservs was Re: permission for screen shots | Agenbroad, James (Civ,ARL/CISD) | Thursday, 19 February |
| [NetGold] FOLKLORE : ARTICLE : INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: LAW: Traditional Knowledge 'In Peril' | David P. Dillard | Thursday, 19 February |
| Re: Re: legal speculation-purpose for legal listservs was Re: permission for screen shots | Robert F. Bodi | Thursday, 19 February |
| Registration of an unpublished work created in the 1960s | Lara Pearson | Thursday, 19 February |
| RE: Re:legal speculation-purpose for legal listservs was Re: permission for screen shots | Agenbroad, James (Civ,ARL/CISD) | Wednesday, 18 February |
| Re: Re: permission for screen shots | Robert F. Bodi | Wednesday, 18 February |
| Re: Re: Sale of Goodwill as Sale of Trademark | Robert F. Bodi | Wednesday, 18 February |
| RE: Re: Those Email Signatures | Harold Federow | Wednesday, 18 February |
| RE: Re: Sale of Goodwill as Sale of Trademark | Harold Federow | Wednesday, 18 February |
| Re: permission for screen shots | Steven Jamar | Wednesday, 18 February |
| Re: Sale of Goodwill as Sale of Trademark | Keith Tabor | Tuesday, 17 February |
| Re: Those Email Signatures | Kevin Grierson | Tuesday, 17 February |
| Re: Re: Amazon.com "Limited License Grant" | Robert F. Bodi | Tuesday, 17 February |
| Re: Re: permission for screen shots | David Dailey | Tuesday, 17 February |
| Re: Those Email Signatures | Steven Jamar | Tuesday, 17 February |
| Re: Re: permission for screen shots | Robert F. Bodi | Tuesday, 17 February |
| Re: Re: permission for screen shots | Robert F. Bodi | Tuesday, 17 February |
| Re: Re: permission for screen shots | Robert F. Bodi | Tuesday, 17 February |
| Sale of Goodwill as Sale of Trademark | Nick Zales | Tuesday, 17 February |
| RE: Those Email Signatures | John Mitchell | Tuesday, 17 February |
| Re: [NetGold] MICROSOFT : NEWS: Ruling Puts Microsoft's 'Windows' Trademark at Risk | sstouden[_at_]thelinks.com | Tuesday, 17 February |
| Re: Those Email Signatures | Brock Shinen, Esq. | Monday, 16 February |
| Re: Those Email Signatures | Keith Tabor | Monday, 16 February |
| RE: Legal theory translation help please | Paula Holm Jensen | Monday, 16 February |
| RE: Re: Publication through public display | Christine L. Sundt | Monday, 16 February |
| CCC transaction reporting | Liz Davis | Monday, 16 February |
| Those Email Signatures | Mike Bradley | Monday, 16 February |
| RE: Re: Publication through public display | Robert Panzer | Monday, 16 February |
| sims copyright issues for artists | SimHippy[_at_]aol.com | Monday, 16 February |
| Re: Questions concerning section 506(c) | Kathleen Williamson | Monday, 16 February |
| Re: Questions concerning section 506(c) | Joseph Pietro Riolo | Monday, 16 February |
| Lawsuit against Austin, TX Copyshops | Smith, Robert E. | Monday, 16 February |
| [NetGold] MICROSOFT : NEWS: Ruling Puts Microsoft's 'Windows' Trademark at Risk | David P. Dillard | Monday, 16 February |
| Legal theory translation help please | Mike Holderness | Monday, 16 February |
| RE: owner/authorship problem | Mike Bradley | Friday, 13 February |
| RE: Re: owner/authorship problem | Mike Bradley | Friday, 13 February |
| registering works containing trade secrets | Baron, Robert (Phila) | Friday, 13 February |
| Re: owner/authorship problem | Keith Tabor | Friday, 13 February |
| owner/authorship problem | info[_at_]joybutler.com | Friday, 13 February |
| Re: Publication through public display | Vance R. Koven | Friday, 13 February |
| Re: owner/authorship problem | jnoble[_at_]dgsys.com | Friday, 13 February |
| Questions concerning section 506(c) | David Dailey | Friday, 13 February |
| Re: Re: [NetGold] INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: LAW : ARTICLE: How the Current Congressional Database Protection Bill Would Go Beyond Current Law, and Why It is Unconstitutional and Misguided | sstouden[_at_]thelinks.com | Thursday, 12 February |
| owner/authorship problem | Kathleen Williamson | Thursday, 12 February |
| Publication through public display | Lara Pearson | Thursday, 12 February |
| Re: Re: [NetGold] INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: LAW : ARTICLE: How the Current Congressional Database Protection Bill Would Go Beyond Current Law, and Why It is Unconstitutional and Misguided | sstouden[_at_]thelinks.com | Thursday, 12 February |
| owner/authorship problem | Kathleen Williamson | Thursday, 12 February |
| Publication through public display | Lara Pearson | Thursday, 12 February |
| Re: Re: [NetGold] INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: LAW : ARTICLE: How the Current Congressional Database Protection Bill Would Go Beyond Current Law, and Why It is Unconstitutional and Misguided | Edward Barrow | Thursday, 12 February |
| Re: [NetGold] INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: LAW : ARTICLE: How the Current Congressional Database Protection Bill Would Go Beyond Current Law, and Why It is Unconstitutional and Misguided | Roy Murphy | Thursday, 12 February |
| Re: Re: doll manufacturing copyright infringement claims | William T. McGrath | Thursday, 12 February |
| Re: Re: University professors - work for hire | Nancy Willard | Wednesday, 11 February |
| Re: Re: Contribution to a collective work | Vance R. Koven | Wednesday, 11 February |
| Re: Re: Work-made-for-hire: not labor contract | Mike Holderness | Wednesday, 11 February |
| It's baaa--aaack | Wallace J.McLean | Wednesday, 11 February |
| Editorial re Copyright Collectives and Electronic Works | Kim Nayyer | Wednesday, 11 February |
| RE: Re: Work-made-for-hire: not labor contract | Sandy Shepard | Wednesday, 11 February |
| Re: Re: Work-made-for-hire: not labor contract | Brock Shinen, Esq. | Wednesday, 11 February |
| [NetGold] INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: LAW : ARTICLE: How the Current Congressional Database Protection Bill Would Go Beyond Current Law, and Why It is Unconstitutional and Misguided | David P. Dillard | Wednesday, 11 February |
| Re: Re: no-criticism shrinkwrap [Was: "permission for screen shots"] | David Bozak | Wednesday, 11 February |
| Re: Re: Work-made-for-hire: not labor contract | Calle Østergaard - Troll Company ApS | Wednesday, 11 February |
| RE: no-criticism shrinkwrap [Was: "permission forscreen shots"] | ericgoldman[_at_]onebox.com | Wednesday, 11 February |
| RE: no-criticism shrinkwrap [Was: "permission for screen shots"] | Tim Arnold-Moore | Wednesday, 11 February |
| Re: University professors - work for hire | JQ Johnson | Wednesday, 11 February |
| Re: Contribution to a collective work | Steven Jamar | Wednesday, 11 February |
| Re: division of royalties when licensing both trademark and copyright | Theodora Michaels | Wednesday, 11 February |
| Contribution to a collective work | Dodi Schultz | Tuesday, 10 February |
| Re: Contribution to a collective work | Mike Oliver | Tuesday, 10 February |
| Re: Work-made-for-hire: not labor contract | Mike Holderness | Tuesday, 10 February |
| Re: doll manufacturing copyright infringement claims | William T. McGrath | Tuesday, 10 February |
| no-criticism shrinkwrap [Was: "permission for screen shots"] | David Dailey | Tuesday, 10 February |
| Contribution to a collective work | Carol Busby | Tuesday, 10 February |
| Re: Re: famous person's name | Heather Vargas | Tuesday, 10 February |
| Standard Technical Measures | Heather Vargas | Tuesday, 10 February |
| famous person's name | Ruth Dukelow/mlc | Tuesday, 10 February |
| Re: famous person's name | Elizabeth T. Russell | Monday, 9 February |
| RE: famous person's name | Sandy Shepard | Monday, 9 February |
| Copyright in Multimedia works | Raza Ahmed Siddiqui | Monday, 9 February |
| Re: famous person's name | Vance R. Koven | Monday, 9 February |
| RE: Work-made-for-hire: not labor contract | Mike Bradley | Monday, 9 February |
| famous person's name | Kathleen Williamson | Monday, 9 February |
| Work-made-for-hire: not labor contract | John Hampton | Monday, 9 February |
| RE: Re: doll manufacturing copyright infringement claims | Jessica R. Friedman | Friday, 6 February |
| RE: Re: permission for screen shots | Chris Mohr | Friday, 6 February |
| Re: doll manufacturing copyright infringement claims | Keith Tabor | Friday, 6 February |
| Re: doll manufacturing copyright infringement claims | Steven Jamar | Friday, 6 February |
| Re: Re: University professors - work for hire | sstouden[_at_]thelinks.com | Thursday, 5 February |
| Re: Re: permission for screen shots | David Dailey | Thursday, 5 February |
| RE: Re: permission for screen shots | Duhaime, Diane | Thursday, 5 February |
| Re: Re: permission for screen shots | Jimmy Wales | Thursday, 5 February |
| Re: permission for screen shots | Carol Simpson | Thursday, 5 February |
| Mellon Postdoctoral Research Fellow | Olga Francois | Thursday, 5 February |
| Re: Re: permission for screen shots | Edward Barrow | Thursday, 5 February |
| RE: Re: permission for screen shots | Mike Bradley | Thursday, 5 February |
| RE: Re: permission for screen shots | Chris Reed | Thursday, 5 February |
| CALL FOR PAPERS: Deadline: February 9, 2004 | Olga Francois | Thursday, 5 February |
| doll manufacturing copyright infringement claims | Jessica R. Friedman | Thursday, 5 February |
| Re: permission for screen shots | John Levine | Thursday, 5 February |
| Re: permission for screen shots | Steven Jamar | Thursday, 5 February |
| permission for screen shots | John Eye | Wednesday, 4 February |
| April 5, 2004 - NYC - TACD workshop on Global Access to Essential Learning Tools | James Love | Wednesday, 4 February |
| RE: Re: University professors - work for hire | Turley, Patrick C | Tuesday, 3 February |
| Re: University professors - work for hire | David Dailey | Tuesday, 3 February |
| RE: Re: CA: WMFH=employee | Agenbroad, James (Civ,ARL/CISD) | Tuesday, 3 February |
| Re: Re: University professors - work for hire | Carol Busby | Tuesday, 3 February |
| Re: Re: Work For Hire Agreements - when must they besigned? | Ivan Hoffman | Tuesday, 3 February |
| Re: University professors - work for hire | Steven Jamar | Tuesday, 3 February |
| Re: Re: Work For Hire Agreements - when must they besigned? | Terry Carroll | Tuesday, 3 February |
| Re: Re: Work For Hire Agreements - when must they besigned? | Terry Carroll | Tuesday, 3 February |
| Section 201 c: any later collective work in the same series | Mike Bradley | Tuesday, 3 February |
| RE: Re: Work For Hire Agreements - when must they besigned? | Mike Bradley | Tuesday, 3 February |
| Re: Re: Work For Hire Agreements - when must they besigned? | John Allison | Tuesday, 3 February |
| RE: Re: Work For Hire Agreements - when must they besigned? | Mike Bradley | Tuesday, 3 February |
| Re: Re: Work For Hire Agreements | Calle Østergaard - Troll Company ApS | Tuesday, 3 February |
| Re: Termination rights, was Work For Hire Agreements | John Levine | Tuesday, 3 February |
| RE: Re: Work For Hire Agreements - when must they besigned? | Sandy Shepard | Monday, 2 February |
| Re: University professors - work for hire | Ivan Hoffman | Monday, 2 February |
| RE: Re: Work For Hire Agreements - when must they besigned? | Mike Phillips | Monday, 2 February |
| Re: Re: fair use question | Robert F. Bodi | Monday, 2 February |
| Re: Re: Work For Hire Agreements - when must theybesigned? | Robert F. Bodi | Monday, 2 February |
| Copyright status of previous manuscripts of published work | Robert E. Jones, III | Monday, 2 February |
| Re: Work For Hire Agreements | Kevin Grierson | Monday, 2 February |
| Re: Re: Work For Hire Agreements | William T. McGrath | Monday, 2 February |
| Re: Re: Work For Hire Agreements - when must they besigned? | Terry Carroll | Monday, 2 February |
| Re: Re: Work For Hire Agreements, termination | John Levine | Monday, 2 February |
| Amicus opportunity for part-time law professors | Malla Pollack | Monday, 2 February |
| University professors - work for hire | David Post | Monday, 2 February |
| Re: Re: Work For Hire Agreements | Calle Østergaard - Troll Company ApS | Monday, 2 February |