Qassia - the mother of all websites Qassia New Zealand
Qassia Global > Qassia New Zealand > fprophet's Intel > Copyright MYTH #3
Intel Contributor
This intel was added by fprophet


Intel Classification
This intel has been classified as Legally Redistributed Content, which means it was not authored by the contributor, but redistribution is legal.

Intel Calendar
October, 2008
12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031

January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October

Sign Up!
Not a member yet? You're missing out on one of the most powerful website promotion resources on the web. Sign up and join the party.

About Qassia
Find out more about Qassia by reading our About Us page, if you haven't done so already. Or you could skip straight to the Sign Up form.

Qassia Mission
The objective of this site is to allow website owners and webmasters to efficiently promote their web sites. Those promoting their websites on Qassia are rewarded with traffic and exposure for their websites in our web directory. The ultimate goal of this site is to obviate the need for link exchanges or submissions to web directories during the SEO (search engine optimization) process, and to instead focus website promotion activity on the development of original content.

PRINT THIS INTEL EMAIL THIS INTEL

Copyright MYTH #3

"If it's posted to Usenet it's in the public domain."

False.
Nothing modern and creative is in the public domain anymore unless the owner explicitly puts it in the public domain(*). Explicitly, as in you have a note from the author/owner saying, "I grant this to the public domain." Those exact words or words very much like them.

Some argue that posting to Usenet implicitly grants permission to everybody to copy the posting within fairly wide bounds, and others feel that Usenet is an automatic store and forward network where all the thousands of copies made are done at the command (rather than the consent) of the poster.

This is a matter of some debate, but even if the former is true (and in this writer's opinion we should all pray it isn't true) it simply would suggest posters are implicitly granting permissions "for the sort of copying one might expect when one posts to Usenet" and in no case is this a placement of material into the public domain.

It is important to remember that when it comes to the law, computers never make copies, only human beings make copies. Computers are given commands, not permission. Only people can be given permission. Furthermore it is very difficult for an implicit licence to supersede an explicitly stated licence that the copier was aware of.

Note that all this assumes the poster had the right to post the item in the first place. If the poster didn't, then all the copies are pirated, and no implied licence or theoretical reduction of the copyright can take place.

(*) Copyrights can expire after a long time, putting something into the public domain, and there are some fine points on this issue regarding older copyright law versions. However, none of this applies to material from the modern era, such as net postings.

Note that granting something to the public domain is a complete abandonment of all rights. You can't make something "PD for non-commercial use." If your work is PD, other people can even modify one byte and put their name on it.

Add to Facebook Digg Add to Mixx Add to Reddit Add to StumbleUpon
Added by fprophet on March 17, 8:01 AM.

PLEASE VISIT THE CONTRIBUTOR'S WEBSITE

Automated Passive Income Systems
Automated Passive Income Systems
football-prophet.com

Rate This Intel

Please login or sign up to rate this intel.

Comments

Please login or sign up to add a comment.





Random Sites and Top Sites [10/15] - We have finally completed this iteration of ...



ABOUT | FAQ | PRESS RELEASES | HELP | CONTACT
USAGE POLICY | PRIVACY POLICY

Copyright 2008 Qassia. All Rights Reserved.

Username:
Password:
No account? Sign up.
Lost password? Retrieve.