Re: [nafex] Copyright issues (formerly Online and in Pirint)

[PermacultureNo1@aol.com]

In a message dated 12/11/00 7:47:13 AM, edforest55@hotmail.com writes:

<< You stated earlier that: "If the board votes to put someone's work 
out there for anyone to access, I think the authors should be advised 
in advance so that they can  withdraw their work if they see fit."

The board already has advised the authors that this is the case, I 
quote: 

"Articles may be reprinted as long as credit is given to its authors 
and Pomona." <<

REPLY:  You almost have a point.  I am indeed aware of the permission the 
board grants to the resources owned by others, and have decided to put up 
with it in print articles.  However in my opinion, disseminating the material 
on the web is going too far.  I would not want to inhibit a member from 
copying an archival copy from the library so that s/he could have use of the 
material.  And I am aware that from time to time leakage beyond that is 
inevitable.  I can accept that.

However, between the time that NAFEX was founded and the time that the Web 
became an issue, the legal situation changed.  Supreme court rulings have 
established that copyright is inherent property of the author or artist or 
other creator of the work.  In the case of works for hire, meaning by an 
employee, the employer holds the copyright unless there is a contract to the 
contrary.  This is a very good ruling.  It means that this post is copyright, 
and no one can do anything with it without my consent.  I have no legal 
training, but yet I think maybe the Supreme Court has more authority in 
determining what is and what is not a right than the NAFEX board.  You cannot 
post a notice obviating my property rights, or anyone's property rights, and 
have it mean anything.  Again, at one time, this notice did mean something 
because copyright resided with the publisher.  Now it does not.  It is like 
me telling people that they are free to take a spin in your car or raid your 
refrigerator.  You still have the same property rights that you did before I 
made my announcement.  I have no authority to give away what is yours.

The coming of photocopy machines and electronic communications has made it 
very difficult for people who create works to control what they create.  
Therefore these issues arise.  

I would agree that there needs to be some material that can freely circulate. 
 I have probably placed more permaculture material in public domain than 
anyone else, maybe more than everyone else.  But it is my choice.  If you 
want to lend someone your car, it is your choice.  It does not mean that now 
anyone can use your car.  

My suggestion is that the bord might consider requesting express permission 
to post articles on the web.  Meanwhile, I will include a fairly explicity 
copyright notice on my submissions.  

A lot of people seem to get a thrill from seeing their names in print.  For 
someone who has written for a living for 45 years, it is more of a concern to 
see one's name where it wasn't offered.  

I don't know if this is true of the NAFEX board of directors, or only of some 
of its membership, but I have seen Boards grow out of touch and get very 
autocratic in other organizations.  That is the beginning of the end.  I've 
always admired NAFEX as an organization, I think POMONA is worth way more 
than the membership fee, and the library is a phenomenal resource.  I think 
maybe it is time take a serious look at some sort of balance between making 
material available and giving away the farm.

>>This is found on the front cover of every Pomona.
The above notice clearly allows us to share information found in our 
egroup as well as Pomona, ""

REPLY;  This is patently untrue.  Even if the Pomona notice had any force, 
which it does not, it cannot be construed to apply to anything which is 
nominally associated with NAFEX.  Next you will be saying that someone can 
enter the files or computer of a member and copy what they find there because 
the person is a NAFEX member and you have a notice in Pomona.  Please think 
about this again.

>>
I have ingnored the objections of a few who 
think that I need to re write material or request permission from the 
authors.<<

REPLY:  Some of the few happen to be justices of the Supreme Court.


>>I would encourage the rest you to do so also, as a right 
that isn't used is a right that is lost.<<
 


REPLY;  There is no "right to steal."

DH

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/0/_/423498/_/976544017/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->