On 01/20/99, Bob Stock <bstock[_at_]attymail.com> wrote:
>
> Under US law the above notice would be invalid as it doesn't identify
> the copyright owner in the notice.
You'll have to complain to the law review about that -- I don't set the type.
> 17 U.S.C. 401(b)(3). Judith no doubt provided assistance in the
> research as to the necessity of the phrase "all rights reserved." :-)
No, I think she would have been about -- oh, fourteen -- when that research was done.
> I hasten to add that there is *another* copyright notice on this
> article (this is in Lexis) where the South Carolina Law Review claims
> a copyright. Different year. No reservation of rights. Makes total
> sense to me. :-)
Oh, if you look a little harder you can probably find several articles with multiple notices where I claim the copyright, and the law review claims the copyright, AND West or Lexis claims the copyright. Funny thing, though, I almost never assign any rights to the law reveiw or the database via a signed writing.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:34 GMT