Mendelson: Levity's Rainbow

Tue Aug 1 19:58:28 CDT 2006

Dave, thanks for the reminder of rj's previous stance
on this issue.  Funny to see him crayfish on it,
but...

Nice, I guess, that rj seems to be offering
*something* in exchange for online friendship &
support, but...

I like the way you do the citations, lots of material,
and almost always right on the money in terms of
helping to illuminate the topic at hand. Plus you
usually take the time and make the effort to add your
own commentary as to how it ties in to the discussion.

rj's non sequitor offers are OK, but wouldn't it be
better to see the guy work some quotes into a
reasonable, non-interpersonally-toxic argument, as
well as provide access to the full text so we could
make sure he's not selectively editing or otherwise
messing with the source material.  He's burned us in
the past that way.

Obviously, it's easier to offer a pdf, then pick and
choose who's going to be able to get a copy.  Yet
another way to *try* to control, dominate, and
otherwise run Pynchon-l as his private preserve, in my
extremely humble opinion.

Kicking myself for not grabbing those fab pdf's (as if
he'd give me one!),

--- Dave Monroe <monropolitan at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 08:11:14 +1100 
> Subject: Re: Cheese Danish #35 
> From: "jbor" <jbor@[omitted]> 
> To: pynchon-l@[omitted] 
> 
> ----------
> >From: Dave Monroe <monroe@[omitted]>
> > "Acting as if ..."?  Well, actually, I more often
> > feel as if I'm being lectured to, esp. as some of
> > you have far more time, far more patience, and far
> > more incentive to prepapre yr notes
> 
> Let alone to type out pages and pages of wordy
> quotes
> from books at seeming random, in what must amount to
> a
> virtual defiance of copyright law. Or, as elsewhere
> here, to invent all those charming "impersonations"
> and start up and maintain all those offshore email
> accounts just to keep the hoaxes going (let alone
> sending off-list mail to check how well the
> hoax-identity has taken as well). Oh well, to each
> his
> own, as they say.
> 
>
http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=0011&msg=51055
> 
> 
> "Typ[ing] out pages and pages of wordy quotes from
> books"--guilty as charged.  I do and do and do for
> you
> kids ...
> 
> "At seeming random"--hardly.  Y'all might not always
> get the relevance of those "wordy quotes" ("wodry"
> not
> in the least by virtue of being composed of, well,
> words), but I'm always happy to at least attempt to
> explain.  Let me know ...
> 
> "a virtual defiance of copyright law"--"virtual,"
> yes,
> esp. as I posted, am posting, and will continue to
> post to our shared virtual relaity here; "defiance,"
> well, I'd call it "fair use" ...
> 
> One of the rights accorded to the owner of copyright
> is the right to reproduce or to authorize others to
> reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords. This
> right is subject to certain limitations found in
> sections 107 through 118 of the Copyright Act (title
> 17, U. S. Code). One of the more important
> limitations
> is the doctrine of "fair use." Although fair use was
> not mentioned in the previous copyright law, the
> doctrine has developed through a substantial number
> of
> court decisions over the years. This doctrine has
> been
> codified in section 107 of the copyright law.
> 
> Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes
> for which the reproduction of a particular work may
> be
> considered "fair," such as criticism, comment, news
> reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
> Section 107 also sets out four factors to be
> considered in determining whether or not a
> particular
> use is fair:
> 
> --the purpose and character of the use, including
> whether such use is of commercial nature or is for
> nonprofit educational purposes;
> 
> --the nature of the copyrighted work;
> 
> --amount and substantiality of the portion used in
> relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and 
> 
> --the effect of the use upon the potential market
> for
> or value of the copyrighted work.
>  
> The distinction between "fair use" and infringement
> may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no
> specific number of words, lines, or notes that may
> safely be taken without permission. Acknowledging
> the
> source of the copyrighted material does not
> substitute
> for obtaining permission.
> 
> http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
> 
> Jeez, I hope THAT was "fair use" ... but, hey, I'm
> actually typing in BY HAND (I do and do and do ...)
> excerpts (vs. complete works) from texts I more
> often
> than not own my own copy of, for, indeed,
> "criticism,
> comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and
> research."  Those posts may or may not be
> "educational" for y'all, but they sure are
> "nonprofit"
> for me.  Not that I'm complianing, but ...
> 
> Well, hell, you'd think from all the foofaraw
> (again,
> key words ...) I was simply scanning entire articles
> from library holdings and offering 'em up for grabs
> online or somesuch.  DE-thpicable ...
> 
> But wait, there's more ...
> 
> "Invent[ing] all those charming
> 'impersonations'"--huh?  Speaking of "invention" ...
> but to come clean,  I did once, to the best of my
> recollection, post in such a way here that it
> wouldn't
> be clear, not immediately, at least, that I was
> responsible ...
> 
>
http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=0405&msg=91030
> 
> Sorry 'bout that, Umberto, Joe ...
> 
>
http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=0405&msg=91020
> 
>
http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=0405&msg=91043
> 
> Solely in the name of a gag (reflex) ...
> 
> "... let alone sending off-list mail to check how
> well
> the hoax-identity has taken as well"
> 
> Again, I've no idea what Robt. was ranting about
> there, but, well, again, not guilty.  But whatever
> it
> was, I'm curious if it was any worse than, say,
> taking
> something not only told to one in strict confidence,
> but also explicitly framed as hearsay, entering it
> anonymously, even while naming one's confidant in
> the
> process, in an online encyclopedia of at best
> tenuous
> reliability, then referring back to said entry as
> authorizing a claim which the entry itself, however
> much ALREADY compromised, doesn't itself support. 
> But, well, to each his own, so ...
> 
> --- pynchonoid <pynchonoid at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > Just curious, given the many many times you chided
> > (or worse) Dave Monroe and myself for quoting
> > copyright protected works on the p-list, back in
> > the day,  I wonder what legal rights you have to
> > distribute these pdf versions of copyrighted
> > articles?
> >
> > --- jbor at bigpond.com wrote:
> > 
> > > One of the positive reviews of _Vineland_,
> written
> > > by one of TRP's foremost critics:
> > > 
> > > 'Levity's Rainbow' by Edward Mendelson, _The New
> > > Republic_ 203.2-3, July 9 & 16, 1990, pp. 40-46.
> > > 
> > > Pdf available offlist.
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> 

http://pynchonoid.org
"everything connects"

http://OnlineJournalist.org

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 