RWC102@PSUVM (R. W. F. Clark) (02/06/89)
In article <6277@rayssd.ray.com>, gmp@rayssd.ray.com (Gregory M. Paris) says: > >Following the precedent established by Brad Templeton with rec.humor.funny, >I hereby claim ownership of the group rec.arts.startrek. True, I am not >the moderator of the group, but I have put much effort into reading it over >the years, and have posted articles that caused me personal trauma. I >believe that this gives me more than ample right to claim ownership. This, perhaps, is the most absurd exaggeration of Brad's statement I have yet to see. Those who object to Brad's 'commercialization of the net' seem to fail to notice that his compilation copyright at least makes it possible to _avoid_ commercialization of the net by Compu$erve and other online services which stand to make millions by outright plagiarism. More importantly, what has Brad actually done? I certainly don't see the likelihood of Brad reaping obscene profits from the proceeds of his group as being even worth considering. Yes, 'his group.' By making his statement, Brad has done nothing more than formally claim a right which has always implicitly belonged to him. > >I have not yet decided what the new rules for the group will be, but you >can be sure they will be quite reasonable. I just wanted to stake my >claim before anybody else did. More later. Unfortunately, Mr. Paris always has more deranged gibberish to post. [Note: In responses to this article, please spare me any idiocy which states that Brad's formal claim to compilation copyright in any way limits the rights of a joke submitter. After it's been explained repeatedly and in great detail by Brad and others, there are still some dips out there incapable of understanding its intricacies. I've seen _three_ articles today by people who couldn't tell copyright law from a hole in the ground.] rwfc psuvax1!psuvm.BITNET!rwc102