At 5:32 AM -0700 11/23/97, Mikhael Frieden wrote:
It is interesting that while almost the entire body of copyright law deals with materials other then what is to be covered, the industry has enough clout to get their's singled out for the first criminal penalties for violation.
This leaves the bulk of copyrighted material, printed material, photographs and the like open to being stolen as does nizkor for example.
I mentioned this point back when I was on the Cyberia-l list a few years ago. Some of the law professors on the list were complaining that their copyright rights were being violated by the quoting or forwarding of articles. And the major newspapers were sending out threatening letters, which were generally heeded by the "offenders." Well, what about _my_ stuff? (More generally, anybody's stuff.) Why does Professor Joe Shmoe or "The New Attleboro Times" have a greater claim to "copyright violations" than Fred Nobody? This is a semi-rhetorical question, as it mostly involves who is willing to hire a lawyer to enforce such property claims. But, as M. Frieden notes, the deck is stacked in favor of large newspapers, publishers, and even professional authors, and is stacked against private individuals and lesser authors gaining access to the courts. "Some copyrights are more equal than others." (Personally, I don't really believe in copyrights.) --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."