|
MAYBE MORE THAN YOU WANTED TO KNOW:
1. GETTING COPYRIGHT STARTED: People post's are almost certainly copyrighted at least by the time the post is saved on DU server computer. More specifically, the post needs to be fixed to a tangible medium for copyright protection to start. The saving of the post at the DU server would probably be considered to be fixation to a tangible medium.
2. WHO OWNS THE COPYRIGHT?: The poster, rather than DU, probably owns copyright in the post.
a) Probably no transfer by contract
Hypothetically, DU could specify on its site that ownership of all copyright in posted material is transfereed to DU as a condition on the privilege of posting. This hypothetical strategy might or might not work to automatically transfer copyright ownership. As far as I know, DU isn't doing this, but I must admit that I haven't read all the fine print associated with this site. I sure hope that DU doesn't try to resort to this strategy -- this hypothetical strategy seems kind of oppressive in context of a board like DU.
b) Probably no transfer under work for hire
The copyrighted material generated by an employee in the context of an employer - employee relationship is generally owned by the employer under something called work for hire doctrine (note: on the other hand, work for hire transfer of copyright ownership does not apply to independent contractors). I think that DU would have a really hard time arguing that work for hire applies to our posts, except perhaps the posts of the Administrators and Moderator. Beware, Skinner: if you sell out, you might lose copyright in *your* posts.
3. DISOWNING COPYRIGHT
You can disown, or partially disown, copyright that you own. One of the above posters on this thread has made such a renunciation. For DU posters, the question is: is DU requiring that we disown copyright as a condition of posting? I don't know, I haven't read all the fine print. The moderator's comment above regarding "public information" might possibly be argued as a requirement that DUers disown their copyrights, however the mods comment probably does not require us to disown copyright because: (1) it is not clear that the moderator has authority to speak for DU on copyright legal matter; (2) the comment is buried here on an obscure thread of a large board; and (3) the moderator's words do not really seem to require that we disown copyrights.
4. FAIR USE:
a) What Fair Use Is
One of the above posters astutely identified the fair use doctrine. Fair use means that, under some circumstances, other peolpe can use you copyrighted material without your permission. The fair use law (it is a US statute) gives some general, kind of vague, factors to be considered in deciding whether a given copying is a fair use or a copyright infringement. These factors include, but are not limited to, commercial effect of the copying, educational purposes of the copying, criticism purposes of the copying, amount of copying and so on. The upshot is that it is difficult to say when fair use applies and when it doesn't. Even copyright attorneys can only guess whether a given copyright is fair use or not -- the copier copies at her or his own peril!
b) Fair use copying of DU posts
Many times if a DU post is copied: (1) the copying is for criticism or educational purposes; (2) the copier doesn't make any money off the post; and (3) the copying doesn't deprive DU or the post's author of any revenue they would otherwise get. These are some soft indications that most copying of DU posts might very well qualify for fair use. Whether we know it or not, fair use is the assumption we routinely make when we copy bits of each other's posts. This fair use assumption is probably what the moderator was talking about when referring to posts being public material. Because I am not your lawyer, I can give you no advice as to whether the assumption of fair use is correct. However, I do feel safe in pointing out that I haven't yet heard of a lawsuit brought by a DUer for post copying.
5. REGISTRATION AND MARKING
Marking each individual post (with the copyright symbol, year and author) and registering the copyright with the Copyright Office are probably a good idea if you plan to sue someone for copying your post in the future. Marking and registration are helpful in the litigation process, even though these steps are not generally neccessary to get copyright protection started. You will notice that a I have *not* put a copyright marking on this post. I am not registering my posts with the Copyright Office either. I wonder how many DUers are registering their posts? Since nobody is marking, I would speculate that few or none are registering either.
6. FUN HYPOTHETICAL
Consider a hypothetical where someone started a business publishing messages that the moderators and/or administrators deleted from DU. I know I often get curious about deleted messages and vanished threads. I would consider paying money to see these posts in some instances. If such a business did crop up, how could Skinner stop it? Would Skinner need to gather the authors of the posts he had deleted and get *their* help in shutting down the hypothetical site? Would tombstoned posters agree to help DU? The mind reels.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
