response 66 of 88:

Jul 17 02:31 UTC 2000

I think I'm in agreement with Scott, and as I've posted in another item, I
think that by posting stuff on Grex, you're giving Grex an implicit license to
publish it in this form. After I posted that, it occurred to me that I do web
site work for several trade magazines that have reader forums, and I probably
could get their lawyers, who certainly are familiar with the nuances of
copyright law, to give us a more informed opinion. With that in mind, I plan to
ask the following questions:

1. Who owns the copyright on items posted in reader forums, especially in the
absence of any agreement between the magazines and the users posting items and
responses? (My guess is that the user still has the copyright, but I may be
wrong about this.)

2. By posting an item or response, did the user implicitly give the magazine a
license to use that response when he or she posted it?

3. How far does that license extend? Are the magazines only licensed to use it
in the forum or could they also use it elsewhere?

4. Are the magazines obligated to delete an item or response posted by a user
if that user requests us to do it?

Can anyone else think of questions that should be asked?

response 68 of 88:

Jul 17 02:44 UTC 2000

#4 asks that very question, doesn't it? I made no mention of a scribble or
expunge command because the software we use does not have that feature. Users
would have to request that the post be deleted.

response 70 of 88:

Jul 17 05:40 UTC 2000

I think it would be very interesting to hear the responses you get to 
those questions. I will guess (only guess, mind you) that the answers 
will turn out to be as follows, conditioned on the assumption that there 
is no explicit agreement between the magazine and the posting users:

(1) The user owns the copyright, as long as it is the user's words.
    If the user had copied the words from elsewhere, the user does not
    obtain any rights, and may possibly be infringing on others'
(2) Yes
(3) Only for the forum it was posted in, not for print publication, for 
    example (unless there was an agreement)
(4) No (but remember, I am only guessing)

response 72 of 88:

Jul 17 17:16 UTC 2000

re sub 1:
        Why would grex be responsible for the liability of a user?
        Let B's legal-aid deal with A.

re sub 2:
        Why the hell would admin feel responsible - or WANT the
        responsibility - of pretending to own and echo A-text to the
        B-party?? That's an issue for B to pursue with A, (or B's attorney
        can request the material, they can't well request more with all
        the related anonymity, now can they?)

re sub 3:
        B is purporting that the material is a quote of A's material.
        Will you now pretend that "quotes" can't be emulated? Or, that A
        can't simply deny authorship? Anonymity is a two-edged blade, is
        it not?
        See "re sub 2" and "re sub 1".

        We're back to specious arguments.. WHAT and WHY is grex? Cut to
        the chase - then, before we play "pretend we're a magazine",
        please read the fine-print on submissions - articles, letters,
        etc. (this applies elsewhere, not to the prior post).

        Let's also play with the oft-mentioned "cliques" of bbs-users and
        party-users - as well as the PTB feelings that Grex *IS* it's bbs.

        To date, there is NEVER a "greeting" in Picospan or Backtalk that
        talks about whom owns what, such as a newspaper or magazine
        would. It's not in a greeting or join, not in 'help' and 
        apparently, not even the PTB have a clue what they want to say.
        WHY?

        Further, there has been, (to my knowledge), not a bit of
        discussion concerning the future of "conferencing" on or via Grex
        in light of Goals, Community, Mission, Future, or whatever else..
        Instead, there is a truly conservative manner, (even clandestine
        and parochial), in approaching the simple concept of deperming one
        lousy file. The arguments against it wander all over the place in
        hopes that one or more "lucky shots" will hit something.
        WHY?

response 74 of 88:

Jul 17 19:33 UTC 2000

        I neglected to notice: Was the log to be depermed BEFORE the admin
        got involved?

        Then too: Why is the staff manually involved, again?

response 76 of 88:

Jul 18 00:48 UTC 2000

Yeah, it's simply awesome the "pain", (I call it the 'curb'), that
some folksies think is cute.. The "curb" is low everywhere else and,
if one mentions it's TOO low, one is smacked.. So, the folksies want
to RAISE the curb where it protects their precious and special
interests. Amusing in it's own depressing way...

response 78 of 88:

Jul 27 15:07 UTC 2000

It doesn't?  The Library of Congress and innumerable public libraries
make it their business to archive old newespapers and magazines "in
perpetuity".  I think they'd be very much surprised to learn that
their archiving activity is illegal, or that they'd have to snip out
selected parts of their archives on demand.

response 80 of 88:

Jul 27 15:56 UTC 2000

I don't think it's clear whether we're archiving or republishing.  THis is
where the analogy breaks down.

response 82 of 88:

Jul 27 16:35 UTC 2000

Re #78: Oh, I dunno.  Didn't they do that kind of revisionism in _1984_? 
Maybe we're living in the past. ;>  The Soviet Union also used to edit old
photos to remove people they'd "disappeared."

response 84 of 88:

Jul 27 18:13 UTC 2000

I would think that we are an archiver.   We (that be Grex) is not changing
it any anyway when tyhey move it to another file, or whatever.  Now, even
where I work at it is microfilm publishing, but we have rights with the paper
publishers to actually archive it.  And we charge them.

response 86 of 88:

Jul 27 18:21 UTC 2000

jif slipped in

response 88 of 88:

Jul 28 18:12 UTC 2000

Re #81: I'd appreciate an explanation too.