Re: copyright
- From: ryanh@[redacted]
- Subject: Re: copyright
- Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 11:47:27 -0600
If memory serves, wasn't there a new addition to copyright law in the
last 15 years that made it illegal if the copyright notice was altered
or removed? For example, changing the copyright date to a different
year, on purpose, or removing it completely, so people might think a
work is in the PD?
Could this also be applied to sites or products that stick their
copyright notice on text that is in the public domain, not adding
anything new or unique? By placing a new copyright statement (new year,
person who owns the copyright, etc.) in an etext, they are
misrepresenting the true copyright status of the work, ie that it is
actually in the PD, and has lost all copyright protection?
I don't have a problem with a copyright statement like: "All formatting
and additional hyperlinked metadata (c) so-n-so inc." It's a pet peave
of mine when someone puts up a word-for-word scanned copy of a book and
claims copyright for the whole thing.
Ryan
----- Original Message -----
From: Rod Hay <rodhay@[redacted]>
Date: Tuesday, May 1, 2001 3:45 pm
Subject: Re: [BP] copyright
> One can put a copyright notice on anything. That does not mean
> that it
> will stand up in court. Or that the courts will even listen to a
> complaint.