Re: Netiquette--Is permission required?

[Jan Boomsliter <boom -at- CADENCE -dot- COM>]

Let's keep this stuff sorted out.  I submit the following for consensus.

The following points have to do with quoting, with and without
permission, and/or attribution (nothing to do with copyright):

- When we speak to an identified news organization or rep thereof, we
  give tacit permission to be quoted
- We are not public figures
- Public or not, no one should be quoted without attribution

The following has to do with the rights to what we post to this list:

- The originator owns the words
- If the posting is to the list - not private, tacit permission is
  given to reprint to members of the list, with attribution and with
  any editing noted.
- Permission to quote away from this list is not implied.
- Eric has spoken: no quoting without permission.

jb
==============================
 Bob Lord wrote--

    Sort of!!! The essence of the question I posted is this:
    Does someone  give tacit approval to reuse opinions,
    discussion, etc, by putting these "in the  public domain" on
    the List?  After all, public figures are quoted all the time
    (many times out of context, and much to their dismay) in the
    media, why  shouldn't tech writers? (with reference to where
    the quote came from, of  course.)
 ==========
 My opinion on this is "no." Here's a couple of analogies:

 1. Small analogy:  I write a poem that I'd like to share with
 others in the building where I work, so I post it on the
 bulletin board. Just because I've posted it to the bulletin
 board doesn't mean I've given implicit permission for them to
 copy it and submit it to some magazine. It is still my original
 work for which I retain rights to. All I've done is let them see
 my work (by *my* choice), I haven't "given" it to them.

 2. Large analogy:  Millions of people subscribe to magazines.
 Many of those magazine publishers own the copyrights to the
 articles that are printed in them. The magazines are distributed
 to their millions of subscribers. Do those articles now become
 "public domain." Heck, no.

 Someone else on the list described this much better in copyright
 terminology--it may have been Arlen(?).

 As far as public figures go, their spoken words may be quoted
 and their likeness may be used, but I believe their written
 words are afforded the same level of protection by copyright law
 as any other person.

     =*=  Beverly Parks =*= bparks -at- huachuca-emh1 -dot- army -dot- mil  =*=
    =*=  "Unless otherwise stated, all comments are my own. =*=
     =*=   I am not representing my employer in any way."  =*=