Re: e-list copyright protection

On Thu, 11 Mar 1999, Keith Galestock <kgalestock[_at_]nacs.org> wrote:
>
> To the e-list group:
>
> I also am impressed with the thoughtfulness of comment from the goup,
> and as another "newbie" I am hoping you can help me with a question:

I'm sure many others share your views on this group. Wonderfully attentive and the debates are civilised. Unlike some groups... And congratulations to our moderator for exercising a firm but measured control over the correspondence.

> I am an editor working for a trade association that moderates several
> electronic discussion lists. I was working under the impression that I
> could quote material, ie " John doe stated in a recent posting..." with
> impunity, but was told that "legal minds" consider postings copyrighted
> by the author, and therefore anyone wishing to use material verbatim
> must first gain permission. I was likening it to a conversation, in
> which I was quoting someone (thus no permission needed). I am told
> there have yet to be legal precedents specifically set on whether or
> not this issue of list e-mail conversations is copyright protected.
> Anyone know more about this and how I should view it?

It's tragic, but the scope of copyright and other proprietary rights is being pushed way beyond workable limits. There's an awful rush to own every particle of knowledge. I can also recommend a small article recently appearing in the NY Times ("Patent and Copyright Laws are a Can of Worms", by Denise Caruso). The examples of blatant abuse of process and economic power by entrenched businesses are frightening. This trend in the US to grant soft patents is very worrying. The fact that the Patent Office is granting them at all, suggests that the level of expertise in the assessing rooms is dropping.

The test of "substantiality" has to be applied to any claim for copyright infringement arising from an (actual or alleged) "unauthorised reproduction". Excerpts such as the ones you note are rarely large enough or substantial enough to be actionable. "Fair use" rights generally extend to attributed quotes of passages used for the purposes of review or criticism. Whether these are derived from First Amendment-type grounds or are embodied in the relevant copyright laws, the effect is similar - it gives users a bit of lee-way in which to operate. The balance point between proprietary rights and public use is a fine one: and it moves in response to public pressure.

Incidentally - anyone interested in copyright and the net has to read "The Nature of the Book" by Adrian John (University of Chicago Press). Amazing book.

CS

"Galvanising Ideas"

Colin Seeger, Consultant, Management of Intellectual Property. P.O Box 3227, Tamarama, Sydney, Australia 2026 Tel: (61) (02) 9365 1186, Fax (61) (02) 9365 1286 <seeger[_at_]ozemail.com.au> Received on Sat Mar 13 1999 - 12:10:43 GMT