> 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?
Lending libraries are permitted under the use of a physical (or licensed)
copy of a book. However, that does not grant the owner of the physical
copy permission to indiscriminantly make hundreds of copies or to permit
others to make hundreds of copies. Placing a list archive on the net does
exactly that, so the choice of whether to archive and the approval of
any archive site is within the purview of the copyright holder.
In my case, several years ago I consulted an intellectual property attorney
on another matter involving my lists. Based upon that advice, I now place
an "X-Compilation-Copyright" header on all posts that go through my lists
and the list instructions advise posters of my assertion of that compilation
copyright, which I have been advised gives me control over archiving rights.
--
Mike Nolan
|
|
