Re: Where is the beef???

[deven@MCS.COM (DEVEN ATKINSON)]

In article <19980903203821275875@ts4-54.aug.com>,
Rick <nojunkhattonr@aug.com> wrote:
>DEVEN ATKINSON <deven@MCS.COM> wrote:
>
>> In article <35EEF0C3.548A66C6@swbell.net>, Rubywand  <rubywand@swbell.net>
>> wrote: > >     There is no disagreement that copyrighted software should
>> not be >maintained on a site if the copyright owner objects. >
>> 
>> This is where your thinking is wrong.  By copyrighting something the
>> author *is* already objecting.  Otherwise it would not have been
>> copyrighted and would have always been in the public domain. It is silly
>> to think that the copyright owner *can* track down every instance of
>> piracy and object.  The current case with CheckWorks is a fine example of
>> how the owner does object, but was unaware. It is *not* incumbant on the
>> owner to hunt down violations, it *is* incumbant upon those uploading
>> software to honor copyrights.
>
>So points on copyright. First there is a differnece between copyrighted
>material, shareware, freeware and commercial apps. Almost all shareware
>and commercial apps are copyrighted, and some frewware apps are. A
>copyright in and of itself does not prevent duplication of material. The
>copyrigt notice, which should state whether copyrighted material can be
>duplictated, does.
>
You are correct.  And the lack of a notice stating that the software is
freeware, etc. is not tacit agreement that it is freeware.

>as for defense of copyrights, authors are supposed to defend their
>copyrights. If they do not, many times they loose the copyright.
>
>
They will only loose the copyright if it can be demonstrated that they
were *aware* of the violation.  Otherwise, not only will they not loose
the copyright, but they can also collect damages.

Some will point out that we are talking about small sums of money here.
That does not matter.  An extra $20 in my pocket can rent a movie my
boys want to see, and feed them pizza while we watch it.  (as opposed to
tv re-runs and normal fare)

Thanks for the information.  I was using the term copyright to mean both
the ownership, and the notice.  I'll make sure I'm more correct in the
future. :)



-- 
Regards,
Deven D. Atkinson
deven@mcs.net   <*>