On Thu, 5 Nov 1998, Moritz.ROETTINGER <moritz.roettinger[_at_]dg23.cec.be> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 3 Nov 1998, Lance Purple <lpurple[_at_]netcom.com> wrote:
> >
> > - If you leave your car, your wallet, etc. abandoned in a
> > public place for several years, it typically ceases to
> > be your property.
>
> Is this really the case in US law? In the European countries I am
> familiar with this is not the case. You would have to actively
> declare that you abandon the object. Even then, in the case of a
In my municipality, (Austin, TX), any property such as livestock, motor vehicles, umbrellas, etc. left unattended in a public place for 48 hours may be impounded. If so, the owner is notified, and has a specific number of days to pay a fine and reclaim the item. After that, the property is considered deliberately abandoned and is usually sold at public auction (or given away for adoption in the case of abandoned pets). See the City of Austin, TX Code of Ordinances at <URL http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/>, sections 3-2-10, 3-3-92, 10-3-1, and 10-3-25. (disclaimer: I am not an attorney).
> Abandoning property is a legal figure which is very rare in practice.
Not in the US, it isn't. Most Sunday editions of newspapers have -at least- a full page of notices for abandoned property auctions.
> If the publisher refuses a reprint, why should the author's
> copyright protection be put into question?
If the publisher doesn't want to print the work, why shouldn't the public be allowed to make their own copies, possibly paying a per-copy tax? (which I have been told is the law in Australia) Otherwise, the law is simply helping the publisher to cheat both the author and the reading public. The law isn't supposed to help -cause- market failures...
Lance Purple
<lpurple[_at_]netcom.com>
..----------------------------.
'----------------------------'Received on Fri Nov 06 1998 - 21:30:27 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:33 GMT