gordon@sneaky (02/02/86)
I note that complaints are being made about the uucp maps being sent
with a long expiration date.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WHAT MAPS ??? <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
The only thing I have received in mod.map (since it was renamed to that
from mod.map.uucp) is a backbone listing every couple of months. Receiving
this sort of posting regularly supposedly means that mod.map is being
transmitted. Did the line eater suddenly get a huge and very selective
appetite?
Gordon Burditt
...!ihnp4!convex!ctvax!trsvax!sneaky!gordon
P.S. my feed travels (as far as I know)
NEWS (ihnp4?) -> uiucdcs -> convex -> ctvax -> trsvax -> sneaky
(notes gateway)
--
This copyright notice Copyright 1986 by Gordon Burditt. No part of this
notice may be reproduced without inclusion of this copyright notice. wombat@ccvaxa.UUCP (02/03/86)
Two comments on mod.map: Notes (I think) completely ignores the Expire: line. Expiration times are set to a system-wide default and can also be changed on a per-group basis. How often do things appear in mod.map? I haven't seen much of anything there in several months.
mark@cbosgd.UUCP (Mark Horton) (02/15/86)
In article <-1025366@sneaky> gordon@sneaky writes: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WHAT MAPS ??? <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > >The only thing I have received in mod.map (since it was renamed to that >from mod.map.uucp) is a backbone listing every couple of months. Receiving >this sort of posting regularly supposedly means that mod.map is being >transmitted. Did the line eater suddenly get a huge and very selective >appetite? > >NEWS (ihnp4?) -> uiucdcs -> convex -> ctvax -> trsvax -> sneaky > (notes gateway) The UUCP map is posted every month to mod.map, from cbosgd. If you aren't getting it, then something near you is broken. Would the sites on the path above please let Gordon and me know if you're getting the map? (By the way, this month's posting is late since I was out of town. It should be starting up in a day or two. Normally it starts on the 7th of the month.) > >This copyright notice Copyright 1986 by Gordon Burditt. No part of this >notice may be reproduced without inclusion of this copyright notice. Good grief, to be legal I have to include this noise in my followup.
bass@dmsd.UUCP (John Bass) (02/20/86)
> > > >This copyright notice Copyright 1986 by Gordon Burditt. No part of this > >notice may be reproduced without inclusion of this copyright notice. > > Good grief, to be legal I have to include this noise in my followup. Well with the USENET Community holding copyright on EVERY posting to a moderated group like mod.recipes ... every poster should start reserving the rights him/her-self in the other groups before the USENET Community starts claiming wholesale copyright on everything else posted. Personally I don't understand why someone created a corporation to copyright mod.recipes -- and -- (having missed any discussion about it before it happened) I think is was a bad idea to allow it in the first palace ... WHO (like in real people) owns the copyrights 4 years from now??? John
msc@saber.UUCP (Mark Callow) (02/21/86)
> > > Gordon Burditt > > Mark Horton > John Bass > > > > > >This copyright notice Copyright 1986 by Gordon Burditt. No part of this > > >notice may be reproduced without inclusion of this copyright notice. > > > > Good grief, to be legal I have to include this noise in my followup. > > Well with the USENET Community holding copyright on EVERY posting to > a moderated group like mod.recipes ... every poster should start reserving > the rights him/her-self in the other groups before the USENET Community > starts claiming wholesale copyright on everything else posted. Personally > I don't understand why someone created a corporation to copyright mod.recipes > -- and -- (having missed any discussion about it before it happened) I think > is was a bad idea to allow it in the first palace ... WHO (like in real people) > owns the copyrights 4 years from now??? > Good grief! Here are two prime examples of the miscommunication that happens on the net. In the first place Gordon's notice says "This *copyright notice* Copyright". He wasn't copyrighting the article he was poking a little satire at copyrights and legal mumbo jumbo. In the second place what's this about a corporation? The discussion I saw in net.news* regarding mod.recipes went as follows: 1. Brian Reid submits an article saying that someone, whom he didn't name, was intending to publish a collection of the recipes from mod.recipes without even acknowledging their origin far less paying the originators. Brian expressed his own dismay and asked for other opinions. 2. Brian did some research into copyrights including talking with someone in Stanford's Law school. He published another article with his conclusions. He said that under current law copyright on articles on usenet was automatically held by the author even if (s)he didn't include a copyright notice. Brian presumably used a phrase something like "thus copyright is held by the Usenet Community" to summarize this though I don't remember exactly. Now John seems to think that Brian is setting up some kind of corporation called the "Usenet Community". CAVEAT: if there was further discussion on this in mod.recipes I won't have seen it. Phew! Sorry this turned out so longwinded. Could we all please try to *READ* each others submissions and use our brains. -- From the TARDIS of Mark Callow msc@saber.uucp, sun!saber!msc@decwrl.dec.com ...{ihnp4,sun}!saber!msc "Boards are long and hard and made of wood"
bass@dmsd.UUCP (John Bass) (02/24/86)
> > > > Gordon Burditt > > > Mark Horton > > John Bass > > author even if (s)he didn't include a copyright notice. Brian > presumably used a phrase something like "thus copyright is held > by the Usenet Community" to summarize this though I don't > remember exactly. Now John seems to think that Brian is > setting up some kind of corporation called the "Usenet > Community". > > CAVEAT: if there was further discussion on this in mod.recipes > I won't have seen it. > > Phew! Sorry this turned out so longwinded. > > Could we all please try to *READ* each others submissions and use our brains. > -- > From the TARDIS of Mark Callow > msc@saber.uucp, sun!saber!msc@decwrl.dec.com ...{ihnp4,sun}!saber!msc > "Boards are long and hard and made of wood" The copyright must be held by some LEGAL entity -- IE a person, partnership, corporation, or government -- thus since the I doubt that "USENET Community" is the name of a person then there must/can be a non-person entity which holds the copyright under that name. I presumed that someone setup a non-profit or not-for-profit corporation -- otherwise the copyright phrase is void. If someone did/does set such a thing up then WHO controls the assets and how are they to be used if the corporation is disbanded. I know of several cases were several people have done quite well on the assets of a disbanded/mis-used non-profit public service corporation. So the question stands AND the issue remains .... John Bass
msc@saber.UUCP (Mark Callow) (02/27/86)
A while back I wrote: > > author even if (s)he didn't include a copyright notice. Brian > > presumably used a phrase something like "thus copyright is held > > by the Usenet Community" to summarize this though I don't > > remember exactly. Now John seems to think that Brian is > > setting up some kind of corporation called the "Usenet > > Community". > > > > CAVEAT: if there was further discussion on this in mod.recipes > > I won't have seen it. > > > > Phew! Sorry this turned out so longwinded. > > > > Could we all please try to *READ* each others submissions and use our brains. John Bass replied: > > The copyright must be held by some LEGAL entity -- IE a person, partnership, You still aren't *reading* the article. The copyright is held (according to Brian) by the individual authors. Collectively, for simplicity, they were referred to as the "usenet community" which indeed they are. -- From the TARDIS of Mark Callow msc@saber.uucp, sun!saber!msc@decwrl.dec.com ...{ihnp4,sun}!saber!msc "Boards are long and hard and made of wood"