>>>>>stuff that may have already been posted follows<<<<<
I agree with Bill: this is an important question. It seems to me
that there are several issues here.
One issue is copyright which is "attached automatically to a work at the
time it is fixed in a tangible medium". I think this would include e-mail.
We all forward e-mail to each other without much thought as to
the original author. However, I don't think this is copyright
infringement in the classic sense since this is usually done on a
person-to-person basis and no attempt is made to profit financially.
News events are usually not copyrightable and it can be argued that this
newsgroup is newsworthy (though you wouldn't know it from my postings.)
Attribution is another salient issue: was the news source
completely and accurately attributed? I have not seen the article so I
do not know how the comments in question were framed within the
article. Any reporter knows the importance of attribution (with the
possible exception of those at the Argonaut:)) A reporter's information
source should be duly attributed, especially if the information does not
come directly from "the horse's mouth". This seems to me a good CYA
policy for reporters to follow, at the very least.
On the CYA tack, making sure that a particular news source is
actually responsible for the information in question by contacting the
source before publication/broadcast seems a good idea. It is also polite.
Sorry these thoughts are so scattered. I am sure there are whole other
lists, web pages, news groups, etc. devoted solely to this topic--and
probably others on this list that know a lot more about it than I. I
think Bill has the right notion about the private/public nature of this
list. The "party line" seems a good metaphor. I also think that news
organizations should take care not to step over common journalistic
practices just because they are unused to a new medium.
I am not writing here for publication or broadcast: I can be a bit more
coherent if I try (and I would have attributed the quote in the second
paragraph:))
Matt Kitterman
I have Random Access Amnesia
On Mon, 26 Jun 1995, Bill London wrote:
> Sorry Joel, but I am replying again to the side issue, not the one you
> see as most important. I am doing that because I want this publicity
> question resolved more specfically.
> I view this list server as a party line, open to eavesdroppers,
> but not a public comment ready for quoting in a newspaper. I think the
> difference is crucial.
> The chances of you having any reporter calling you back to read
> you a quote, etc, is small--especially not likely wiht the DAily News
> (given their tough deadlines and quotas).
> Is anyone a member of the DAily Nude advisory board??
> CAn we get a clarification from the paper as to what they will
> use from the list server??
> BL
>