Re: Copyright Infringement Happening at Conference Group - Help!

On 7/16/98, Michael A. Scarpitti <mscarpit[_at_]asnt.org> wrote:
>
> On 15, July 1998, Bob Stock <bstock[_at_]ucla.edu> wrote:
> >
> > On 7/14/98, Thomas Workman <tworkman[_at_]erols.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > John Lederer <johnl[_at_]ibm.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Would you like to take a stab at explicating why someone taking
> > > > something off the web violates copyright, but your repeating of
> > > > the entirety of Brigid's message does not?
> > >
> > > Fair use. When one sends an Email, one issues a fair use license
> > > for others to forward it withor without comment. That is the nature
> > > of the medium.
> >
> > I don't think I agree, at least not with the outer bounds of what
> > you're saying. First, I think it's more likely that when one copies
> > e-mail in a discussion list and sends it *to the list* that this is
> > implied license rather than fair use. Second, as with any implied
> > license, the scope of it may not be crystal clear. I doubt that
> > many would argue that copying it within the list is implied, but
> > I'm not as sure that the consensus would be as strong for copying
> > it without the list. And if you're talking about e-mail in general,
> > I would strongly disagree that sending one person's e-mail to others
> > without permission is fair use or implied license.
>
> Since this started with me, can someone explain why merely repeating
> something to a list of recipients who have already received it
> constitutes "copying"?

I'm not sure why it *wouldn't* be copying. Nothing in the definition or concept of "copying" precludes giving a copy to someone who already has one. If I photocopy a book and put the copy on a library shelf next to the original -- or mail it to a list of people I know already own it -- I've still copied it. If I videotape a television show and rebroadcast it from the tape, what difference does it make if everybody who receives the broadcast had already seen the show -- or even taped it themselves?

I haven't followed this thread long enough to comment on the Web-vs-email question, but I think that copying is copying, and distribution of copies is distribution of copies, regardless of whether the recipients already have originals or copies of their own.

Daniel J. Schaeffer
<daniel_schaeffer[_at_]kirkland.com> Received on Fri Jul 17 1998 - 14:25:07 GMT