Richmond and copyright

[Mark Brownell]

On Monday, August 18, 2003, at 04:30  PM, Monte Goulding wrote:

> To All: I think Dar's statement above and the thread that caused his
> response is one that needs more thought and a response from RunRev. We 
> do
> contribute to each other's developments and there are different 
> copyright
> laws in different countries. For example, in Australia the law is such 
> that
> whatever I produce I have copyright over whether stated or not. That 
> means
> that in theory I have copyright over everything I post to this list. 
> I'd
> like to see a legal document on the RunRev site that automatically 
> disclaims
> anyone's right to copyright over posts to this list and perhaps to user
> contributions. The document should also disclaim any liability on 
> behalf of
> the author. The last thing we need is someone getting sued because they
> tried to help!
>
> I hereby disclaim any copyright over and any liability for anything 
> posted
> to this listserve.
>
> Regards
>
> Monte

Monte,

This copyright thread was discussed at length on another list regarding 
postings to that list and copyright issues. Their concerns where about 
finding out that there was an archive of all the previous postings. It 
came up that some wanted to change what they had posted several years 
earlier. St John's Maelstrom was going to drop years before 1999 
because the archive database was getting clogged up. I was going to 
make an MTML version of the dropped years so that it would not be lost. 
The final resolution was that if the messages are not changed they can 
be reproduced (republished) outside of the list without concern for 
copyright infringement. So to those that wanted there messages changed 
the answer was no. The archive is public domain as long as it remains 
in its equivalent form, without changing what was said. I forget the 
law that was sited in regard to this but I could search for copyright 
threads from a year ago in that list's archive.

Mark