On 12:05 PM 8/19/02, Charlie Summers wrote:
>At 2:15 PM -0400 8/19/02, Chuq Von Rospach is rumored to have typed:
>> On Monday, August 19, 2002, at 10:38 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
>> > * Without explicit permission, no-one is allowed to mirror the list,
>> > or create public archives.
>> > * Just telling people about the existence of the list (by mentioning
>> > it in a directory of lists) is ok even without explicit permission.
>> Why do you believe those are implied by copyright law? I'm curious what
>> your rationale is.
One could argue that subscribing and mirroring a mailing list on the
Internet is akin to the paper book parallel of buying a single copy of a
book then putting it in a lending library. In both cases, the "owner"
provided the item to subsequently be shared (via the mailing list
subscription or the book sale). Both purposes serve to make the
information available to a wider group of people. Lending libraries are
permitted by copyright law, even though many book publishers were against
the idea when libraries first became popular. Why should mailing list
mirrors and archives be treated differently?
Note: I'm NOT saying they should, or they shouldn't, just that we should
consider why either of these is a possible interpretation of present
copyright law. I can't find anything specific in Title 17 regarding the
establishment of lending libraries and how they were permitted under
copyright law. :-(
<http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/index.html> For those who want to
read it raw.