on Dale Larson/copyright

[Jeffrey Meikle]

After a couple of months desubscribed and a month of lurking, I can't
resist a few comments on the copyright debate, especially with M&D sitting
mutely on my desk, along with much else that demands attention first if I
want to retain my job.

Dale's latest has a curious sentence that says a whole lot about his
cavalier approach to copyright--whether moral or legal.

Here's Dale on whether or not appending a copyright notice to one's
postings will legally protect them:

>Some legal eagles (turkeys
>if you prefer) think that even such a notice may not be enforcable -- that it
>is basically legal to make ANY use of material posted to a discussion group
>because it has essentially (if not completely) been relinquished to the
>public domain.  That's an extremist point of view, and perhaps most of us
>would hope and prefer the law to be otherwise.  But note Andrew's response --
>what is he to do with such notices?  What if he decides to put together a
>CD-ROM of his archive, is that different?

Frankly I don't care if Andrew publishes a CD-ROM of the archive.  It would
be a great research tool, a permanent record when Andrew's hard drive
crashes (and we know that it too will eventually yield to gravity), and a
source of endless nostalgia when I'm too senile to follow the actual words
of the master.  But note Dale's phrasing:  "What if he [Andrew] decides to
put together a CD-ROM of *HIS* archive..."

I'm going to presume that Andrew regards himself as a scribe, librarian,
recordkeeper, nay, even secretary, to this whole sick crew, and does not
believe that he actually *owns* the contents of the archive.  I've had
heartache in the past because the rare manuscript archive at the U. of
Texas owns the physical paper and ink marks embodying the handwritten words
of certain famous individuals, but their very cantankerous heirs still own
the rights to publish the words.  Those cantankerous heirs can approve or
disapprove the use of a single three-word phrase.

None of us, that I know of, has signed a contract with P-List or with
Andrew to publish us.  The P-List archive is like a rare manuscript
archive.  We retain our rights to every single word until we sign them
away.  And even if some judge determines that P-List postings are NOT like
manuscripts but ARE like published articles or books, fair use would permit
only limited usage, say a paragraph of direct quotation from a 10-paragraph
rant, or a couple of sentences from this post, but it doesn't permit use
without permission of the whole thing.  In the current instance (i.e.
Lineland), I personally don't care.  But if someone had the dough to take
it to court, they just might win.

Cheers,
Jeff



Jeffrey L. Meikle
Director, American Studies Program
303 Garrison Hall, University of Texas at Austin, 78712
phone: 512-471-7277; fax: 512-471-3540