Concerning archives of user submitted posts, we have...
>I am under the impression that any work of any
>author is automatically copyrighted by that author (with or without the
>copyright notice) and publishing that work does not make it public
>It does seem to me obvious that if I post messages about my lost cat on all
>the telephone poles in town, the copyright in the messages is still mine;
>this does not give me the right to demand that the telephone company clean
>them all up.
>It's a scandal to ask for one thing and the contrary : to be ready to use
>the advantages of co-operative work and to keep the advantages of an
>entirely individual way of acting.
>Someone else mentioned telling them "tough cookies" and saying they'd
>have to sue to get it changed. This won't work well either; no
>public (or private) university wants to hear that they're getting
>sued because some computer admin doesn't respect copyrights over
>some list that university might not even be aware of or officially
I'm surprised that no one mentioned the obvious correlation to the opinion
section of any newspaper or letters section of a magazine. It might be that
the opinion piece writer has copyright protection, but that doesn't buy the
right to seek out all copies of the newspaper and destroy the part that they
wrote. Also, I don't think the writer would have the right to have their
work removed from the newspaper's central archives and microfilm unless the
editor had made some mistake when the piece was printed.
I agree with the notion that list discussion should be considered a
group-ware project, not owned by the individual. Conversation and
dialog require more than one party.
I don't recommend taking the "so sue me" approach. Gentle explanation
of "the way things are" would be a much better approach.
It seems that at least once a week, the list-managers-digest gives me
yet another paragraph to add to my digest policy sheet/disclaimer.