I don't know how much of this has to be announced, or stated somewhere in
each case, but I recall some jibberish before each Twins game in my dads
cigar smoke filled car that went something like...

"No broadcast, rebroadcast, in whole or in part bla bla... without the
express written consent of the Minnesota twins..." (the game was broadcast
on wcco AM radio)

You can't have cameras or tape recorders at a concert. While I've seen it
printed on the tickets occasionally, it's not always there but I've never
seen those devices allowed in to these events, which take place in public
facilities.

I never heard Steve Tyler, Billy Joel, or any of the others I've seen come
right out and say this on stage, yet no cameras, recorders, ever.

.02

-mj

And hence AUTHOR wrote: Matthew S. Hallacy
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 08:08:14PM -0500, David Phillips wrote:
>
>> You're right.  You can.  Just like I can make and distribute copies of
>> Windows.  But that doesn't make it legal.
>
> How does this pertain to the current discussion? Did Microsoft publish a
> copy of Windows in a public forum?
>
>> Think about it this way: The creator of a work holds the copyright.
>> What rights you have to use that work are determined by copyright law.
>>  You need to think about why you have a right to do something, not why
>> it could be illegal.
>
> And once you've released something into the public domain you can't
> simply change your mind and retract it.
>
>>
>> The real question is this: What gives me the right to publish someone
>> else's copyrighted work?
>
> If you stand up in the middle of a group of people to make a statement,
> and  that meeting is being videotaped, do you think you have any right
> to demand that anyone with a copy of that video tape erase the parts in
> which you participated?
>
> It's essentially the same thing. The person making the request in this
> case has joined a public forum, that they were well aware is archived,
> and indexed by search engines. This person made a statement that [for
> some reason] they wish to retract.
>
> Now, do you think that _any_ court would order a [large] group of people
> to  erase portions of a recording made in public on the whim of a person
> who made a statement they wish to essentially erase?
>
> If it were possible, former president Clinton would be demanding that
> everyone erase their copy of the 'No, I did not have sex with that
> woman' statements. Trent Lott would have immediately demanded that
> nobody repeat his copyrighted works from Strom Thurmond's birthday
> event.
>
>
> Point: You have to think before you speak, and be prepared to have it
> follow you around for the rest of your life, maybe longer.
>
>
>> That question can likely only be answered adequately by your attorney
>> and ultimately by the courts.
>
> Common sense can go a long way though.
>
>> --
>> David Phillips <david at acz.org>
>> http://david.acz.org/
>
> --
> Matthew S. Hallacy                            FUBAR, LART, BOFH
> Certified http://www.poptix.net                           GPG public key
> 0x01938203
>
> _______________________________________________
> TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota
> http://www.mn-linux.org tclug-list at mn-linux.org
> https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list


---------------------
Jentges.NET, Inc.
Voice: 763.783.3702
Cell:    763.370.1201
---------------------



_______________________________________________
TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota
http://www.mn-linux.org tclug-list at mn-linux.org
https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list