Re: Information & Power /Alexandria library

Gina Miller (
Tue, 04 May 1999 12:15:51 PDT

I don't "cling" to it or anything like a security blanket, I USE it. It protect's my work in what ever terms you want to put it. I have no idea what your problem with what I said is I merely stated why I use it, for poetry (that I too have had published). As long as I'm writing, and the laws are set up as such I will continue to use them. Here's more clarifications for you,

U.S. Copyright Law

Copyright is a form of protection provided by the laws of the United States (title 17, U.S. Code) to the authors of "original works of authorship" including literary, dramatic, musical, artistic, and certain other intellectual works. This protection is available to both published and unpublished works. Section 106 of the Copyright Act generally gives the owner of copyright the exclusive right to do and to authorize others to do the following:

It is illegal for anyone to violate any of the rights provided by the Act to the owner of copyright. These rights, however, are not unlimited in scope. Sections 107 through 119 of the Copyright Act establish limitations on these rights. In some cases, these limitations are specified exemptions from copyright liability. One major limitation is the doctrine of "fair use," which is given a statutory basis in section 107 of the Act. In other instances, the limitation takes the form of a "compulsory license" under which certain limited uses of copyrighted works are permitted upon payment of specified royalties and compliance with statutory conditions. For further information about the limitations of any of these rights, consult the Copyright Act or write to the U.S. Copyright Office....

Gina "Nanogirl" Miller

>From: "Lee Daniel Crocker" < (none)>
>Subject: Re: Information & Power /Alexandria library
>Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 08:36:40 -0700 (PDT)
> > I write poetry, and I wouldn't put it in any type of public eyesight
> > a copyright, this ensures the security of my work. No other party can
> > it to be theirs, at least not for 70 years or so. This is a measure that
> > does hold up in court, if someone else tags their name to a work of
>poetry I
> > created, a copyright proves it. If this is "arguable because we don't
> > protect markets in other things", then get on it, don't try to demean
> > authors have, it's a needed tool. It is for my protection, not the
> > government.
>No one can claim your work as theirs, ever, even without copyright--
>that's simple fraud. Why is it that those most in favor of copyright
>seem to know so little about what it actually is? Copyright is not
>what prevents me from claiming I wrote your poem; it prevents me from
>posting it on my site with the note "Here's a poem I like by Gina
>Miller...". It prevents me from publishing it a collection book, or
>making an artistic variation of it. Copyright has nothing to do with
>protecting the "integrity" of your work or your credit--it's about
>protecting your market from competition. Whether or not that's a
>good thing is still arguable, but let's call a spade a spade.
>I am an author and programmer; I earn my living writing things, most
>of which are copyrighted by my employer. I am thoroughly convinced
>that in a world without copyrights I would earn twice as much money
>as I do now and produce better work, because my storehouse of
>information to draw upon would be freer, and the demand would increase
>for creative work that was timely and original. Artists who cling
>to copyrights like a security blanket deserve my "demeaning", and I
>make no apology for it.
>Lee Daniel Crocker <> <>
>"All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past,
>are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified
>for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC

Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit