About the statutorily-required posting of copyright notice at library copying machines, Nick Zales writes that "people laugh at and mock these notices," and on the basis of this observation, suggests that the law should be amended to dispense with the requirement that such notice be provided. I don't know what "people" he's talking about, or how much time he's spent hanging around copy machines watching "people" to see how they react to such notices. If he means to suggest that the public generally disrespects the copyright laws, maybe he's right -- but I don't think so, outside of certain elements of the Internet subculture. And the notices do benefit the public -- the libraries' rights do not pass through to the library users, who could be liable for infringement whether or not they receive specific notice. I'm not saying that's the only reason or even the primary reason that the requirement was enacted, but I don't see how it helps the public to do away with it. There's another public I'm concerned about too -- the public that reads this list. Personally I feel it is a disservice to them to lob out expressions of attitude without any real analysis, or to suggest that lawyers don't respect the law so they shouldn't have to either. Probably it's true that lots of people finagle their taxes or engage in minor copyright violations, and get away with it -- but any lawyer who's been called upon to represent someone who goes too far and faces financial or professional ruin as a result, and has had to explain to them that it makes absolutely no difference that everyone does it, should realize the danger in being flippant about the force of the law.
Kerry L. Konrad
<k_konrad[_at_]stblaw.com>
Received on Wed Jun 09 1999 - 15:08:01 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:35 GMT