On 1/21/99, Mark Lemley <mlemley[_at_]mail.law.utexas.edu> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 20 Jan 1999, Bob Stock <bstock[_at_]attymail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Here's a newer one:
> >
> > Copyright 1997. All Rights Reserved. The author wishes to thank Judith
> > Ricci for research assistance in the preparation of this Article.
>
> OK, I'm back after a long absence, so if I missed something that
> explains this forgive me.
Nice to see you back.
> But I assume the text Bob cites is in an author's dagger note, and
> therefore immediately follows (or perhaps precedes) the author's name.
> Arguably that is sufficient to "give reasonable notice of the claim
> of copyright." 401(c). Why isn't that ample?
As I noted, I looked at this on Lexis, not in hard copy. Here's the first page down to Dan's name (I've left-justified it):
Copyright (c) 1998 University of South Carolina South Carolina Law Review
Summer, 1998
49 S.C. L. Rev. 695
LENGTH: 25214 words
ARTICLE:
Trademark Doctrines for Global Electronic Commerce *
Dan L. Burk **
I've never heard the phrase "author's dagger note" before, but I'm assuming you mean the small footnoted paragraph that explains who the author is. In other words, the two asterisks next to Dan's name point the reader to another set of two asterisks and a note. If that's so, it is not in the dagger note (which is pretty skimpy and just says his title and where he works) but above his name (and precedes Judith's name).
As to the part of the code that you quote, that is as to *position* of notice, not as to *form* of notice. I don't see how this particular notice complies with the form.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:34 GMT