Vanity Fair : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

I'm in Australia. The latest issue of VF available here is November. The newsagent said the Jan one would come out in March.

Would anyone be able to send me a copy through snail-mail? I'll happily pay all postage, plus the cost of the magazine and even a bit extra if you insist on making a profit ;)


-- Leo (, December 15, 1998


Leo, it's on it's way, i bought a few copies, send me your address to my id.

Cheers, Andy


Does anyone out there fancy typing it out? - I'm sure Mr. Anson wouldn't mind:) maybe a son or daughter taking typing lessons?

I'd do it myself but with my three fingers and one thumb it'd push me over the edge!

-- Andy (, December 15, 1998.

What's a thumb?

-- Uncle Deedah (, December 15, 1998.

Andy: That wa snice of you to help Andy out.

-- bardou (, December 15, 1998.

I'm a fast typist. I wouldn't mind typing it out but I don't have the article. If I can get to the library and make a copy I will do that.

-- Diane (, December 15, 1998.

Troops, before we do this, would SOMEBODY check with the VF people and Mr. Anson? It would be EXTREMELY embarrassing to ED if we were to violate the copyright regs.


-- Chuck a night driver (, December 15, 1998.

My impression (no guarantees!) is that copyright laws allow copying material for personal use w/o explicit permission, but REQUIRE explicit permission from the copyright holder for use in any commercial connection, such as embodiment in another book or media piece.

Aren't there any lawyers out there?

-- Tom Carey (, December 15, 1998.

Re: copying the VF article to the forum. There is a concept known as "fair use" that allows extensive quoting of copyrighted material for certain reasons, such as educational uses. It's the excuse Cory uses when pasting Washington Post articles in the WRP, and it's the legal loophole that allows teachers to photocopy reams of protected material for their lessons. However, fair use is an envelope that can only be pushed so far, and I have to believe that posting the *entire* VF article here would get poor Phil Greenspun in a world of hurt, if VF's lawyers wanted to get hard nosed about it. However -- and I am *not* a lawyer -- I don't see why somone can't post pertinent sections, with perhaps some paraphrasing thrown in to cover the transitions, as an aid to public discussion of the article.

-- jdclark (, December 15, 1998.

I think we're okay with the "Fair Use" Copyright Law in Title 17. Especially since this forum is hosted on an educational institution, MIT computer system. I think wed qualify as a non-profit organization using the materials for research purposes. Afterall, wed only be posting one copy. (Sorry for the long post, but this is an issue discussed before). -- Diane

Note: The relevant portion of the copyright statue provides that the "fair use" of a copyrighted work, including reproduction "for purposes such as criticism, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research" is not an infringement of copyright.

Stanford University Libraries - Copyright and Fair Use - copyright resources, emphasizing libraries, cyberspace, and NII legislation.

October 30, 1998 TO: Members of the Faculty, Hoover Institution Fellows, Academic Stanford University Libraries RE: Copyright Reminder

This memorandum provides a general description of the applicability of the copyright law and the so-called "fair use" exemptions to the copyright law's general prohibition on copying. It also describes "safe harbor" guidelines applicable to classroom copying.

The federal copyright statute governs the reproduction of works of authorship. In general, works governed by copyright law include such traditional works of authorship as books, photographs, music, drama, video and sculpture, and also software, multimedia, and databases. Copyrighted works are protected regardless of the medium in which they are created or reproduced; thus, copyright extends to digital works and works transformed into a digital format. Copyrighted works are not limited to those that bear a copyright notice. As a result of changes in copyright law, works published since March 1, 1989 need not bear a copyright notice to be protected under the statute.

Two provisions of the copyright statute are of particular importance to teachers and researchers:

 a provision that codifies the doctrine of "fair use," under which limited copying of copyrighted works without the permission of the owner is allowed for certain teaching and research purposes; and

 a provision that establishes special limitations and exemptions for the reproduction of copyrighted works by libraries and archives.

The concept of fair use is necessarily somewhat vague when discussed in the abstract. Its application depends critically on the particular facts of the individual situation. Neither the case law nor the statutory law provides bright lines concerning which uses are fair and which are not. However, you may find it helpful to refer to certain third party source materials. Guidelines for classroom copying by not- for-profit educational institutions have been prepared by a group consisting of the Authors League of America, the Association of American Publishers, and an ad hoc committee of educational institutions and organizations. In addition, fair use guidelines for educational multimedia have been prepared by a group coordinated by the consortium of College and University Multimedia Centers (CCUMC). These guidelines describe safe harbor conditions, but do not purport to define the full extent of "fair use."

The guidelines, as well as other source material, are available through a variety of resources, including through the world wide web site Stanford University Libraries & Academic Information Resources, in collaboration with the Council on Library Resources and FindLaw Internet Legal Resources, are sponsors of this web site. The site assembles a wide range of materials related to the use of copyrighted material by individuals, libraries, and educational institutions.

I hope that the discussion below helps to clarify further the nature of "fair use."

I. Fair Use for Teaching and Research

The "fair use" doctrine allows limited reproduction of copyrighted works for educational and research purposes. The relevant portion of the copyright statue provides that the "fair use" of a copyrighted work, including reproduction "for purposes such as criticism, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research" is not an infringement of copyright. The law lists the following factors as the ones to be evaluated in determining whether a particular use of a copyrighted work is a permitted "fair use," rather than an infringement of the copyright:

 the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

 the nature of the copyrighted work;

 the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and

 the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Although all of these factors will be considered, the last factor is the most important in determining whether a particular use is "fair." Where a work is available for purchase or license from the copyright owner in the medium or format desired, copying of all or a significant portion of the work in lieu of purchasing or licensing a sufficient number of "authorized" copies would be presumptively unfair. Where only a small portion of a work is to be copied and the work would not be used if purchase or licensing of a sufficient number of authorized copies were required, the intended use is more likely to be found to be fair.

A federal appeals court recently decided an important copyright fair use case involving coursepacks. In Princeton University Press, v. Michigan Document Services, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit concluded that the copying of excerpts from books and other publications by a commercial copy service without the payment of fees to the copyright holders to create coursepacks for university students was not fair use. The size of the offending excerpts varied from 30 percent to as little as 5 percent of the original publications. Although the opinion in this case is not binding in California, it is consistent with prior cases from other courts, and there is a reasonable likelihood that the California federal courts would reach a similar conclusion on similar facts.

Where questions arise, we suggest that you consult the guidelines for classroom copying and other available source material available on the fair use web site, cited above. Please note that the guidelines are intended to state the minimum, not the maximum, extent of the fair use doctrine. Thus, just because your use is not within the guidelines, it is it not necessarily outside the scope of fair use. In the absence of a definitive conclusion, however, if the proposed use deviates from the guidelines, you should consider obtaining permission to use the work from the copyright owner. In instances where the fair use question is important and permission would be difficult or expensive to obtain, a member of the Fair Use Advisory Group (described below) or the Legal Office can assist in analyzing whether a particular proposed use would constitute "fair use."

Some photocopying services will obtain copyright permission and add the price of the royalties, if any, to the price of the materials. A request to copy a copyrighted work should generally be sent to the permission department of the publisher of the work. Permission requests should contain the following:

 Title, author, and/or editor, and edition

 Exact material to be used, giving page numbers or chapters

 Number of copies to be made

 Use to be made of the copied materials

 Form of distribution (classroom, newsletter, etc.)

 Whether the material is to be sold

Draft form letters can be obtained from or reviewed by a member of the Fair Use Advisory Group or the Legal Office.

For certain works, permission may also be sought from the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) which will quote a charge for works for which they are able to give permission. The Copyright Clearance Center can be contacted at or (978) 750-8400, but it may be easier to go through a copying service that deals regularly with the CCC.

Also, for further info...

United States Copyright Office, The Library of Congress http://

Read... Whats Hot -- H.R. 2281, the conference report on the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998, was enacted on 10/28/98. PDF version


COPYRIGHT LAW OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code

-- Diane J. Squire (, December 15, 1998.

OK, I have an idea. And maybe we should do this on a totally separate thread. What if we take turns typing it? Different people could type a section of it at a time? It is a very long article. It would take a great deal of time for just one person. I'll post the first section:

The Y2K Nightmare

The nightmare scenario goes like this:

It is an instant past midnight, January 1, 2000, and suddenly nothing works. Not A.T.M.'s, which have stopped dispensing cash; not credit cards, which are being rejected; not VCRs, which now really ARE impossible to program. The power in some cities isn't working, either, and that means no heat, lights, or coffee in the morning, not to mention no televisions, stereos, or phones, which - even in places with power- aren't working, either. Bank vaults and prison gates have swung open; so have valves on sewer lines. The 911 service isn't functioning, but fire trucks are on the prowl (though the blaze had better be no higher than the second floor, since their ladders won't lift). People in elevators are trapped, and those with electronic hotel or office keys can't get anywhere, either. Hospitals have shut down because their ventilators and X-ray machines won't work- and, in any case, it's now impossible to bill the H.M.O.

Traffic is a mess, since no streetlights are working. Trains are running, but their control switches aren't, which is bad news for supermarkets, utilities, car dealers, and international trade, which can't move by ship either. Only the brave or foolhardy are getting on airplanes- but with so many countries degenerating into riots and revolution, it's wiser to stay at home anyway. There are no newspapers to read or movies to go to or welfare checks to cash. Meantime, retirees are opening letters saying that their pensions have been canceled because they are minus-23 years old. Many banks and small businesses have gone bust, and it will be weeks- if ever- before the mess that is the broker's statement is sorted out.

On the brighter side, no one can punch a time clock; on the darker, most of the big manufacturing plants have shut down because their lathes and robots aren't working. Pharmacies aren't filling prescriptions; the D.M.V. is not processing license renewals, and everyone's dashboard keeps flashing SERVICE ENGINE NOW. Mortgage payments sent on time have been marked late, and everyone's phone bill is messed up because of all those calls that began in 1999 and ended in 1900. On the Internet- where thousands of Web sites are suggesting how to find God and when to move to the wilderness- the acronym for what's occurring is TEOTWAWKI: The End Of The World As We Know It.

-- Gayla Dunbar (, December 16, 1998.

Oh, folks, come on! Entering the entire article, or even major portions of it, here on this forum would clearly be a copyright violation. Please don't do that.

-- No Spam Please (, December 16, 1998.

... and pretending that it'd be all right if you post it in separate sections is just lying to yourself.

-- No Spam Please (, December 16, 1998.

No Spam, I wasn't suggesting typing only sections of it to avoid copyright infringement. It is a VERY long article. There is NO way I would sit here and type the whole thing. I don't have that much time. Besides, I don't feel bad about copying portions of the article here. Thanks to this forum, Vanity Fair will sell MANY more copies of that particular issue. IMHO, if they were smart, they would appreciate the "advertisement".

-- Gayla Dunbar (, December 16, 1998.

I thought some of the juiciest parts of the "Vanity Fair" article are the ones about how long the prez and vice-prez have known about Y2K. You can read a few highlights about their early awareness at this link:

"VF: Clinton knew Y2K was serious at the beginning of 1996"

-- Kevin (, December 16, 1998.

Sorry about that last link. It's late. Here's the link for "VF: Clinton knew Y2K was serious at the beginning of 1996"...

-- Kevin (, December 16, 1998.

Tony power - pls send me your snail address to my id - I replied but got bounced --- cheers, Andy

-- Andy (, December 16, 1998.

Besides which, If we ask for permission, they MIGHT give it to us in machine readable form which makes asking a LOT easier for all of us who are lazy.

And I would reiterate that simply typing it in will get both Phil and Ed in VERY HOT WATER!!

Would it not be embarrassing to have caused the loss of the forum because we were so DUMB as to NOT get permission??

As I read the stuff above, fair use covers teaching, and a few minor other places, for EXCERPTING.

IF YA WANNA EAD IT, GO BUY THE GD MAG (where available).

Just my NTBHO


PS If I'd written it, I'd give permission, but a pro author I know, who does workshops would NOT, so.....

-- Chuck a night driver (, December 16, 1998.

Chuck, the whole point of my post was that the mag ISN'T available in Australia, at least not for a couple of months.


-- Leo (, December 16, 1998.

Don't waste your breath Chuck. Diane is special. Rules don't apply to her. She will do as she damn well pleases. It doesn't matter if it will hurt the forum. It only matters that it pleases her.

-- Dieter (, December 16, 1998.

Has anyone thought about contacting Vanity Fair and pleading with them to make this article available on their website?

This would give them total control and eliminate all copyright concerns. Perhaps we could contact the author directly and see if he has any pull with the organization.

I know they don't 'publish' their articles on the web but it seems to me this is a special case.

Just a suggestion. I do think the article is extremely valuable.


-- Arnie Rimmer (, December 16, 1998.

Dieter (,

Before you spout off you just might want to investigate "the rules" on copyright, rather than assume. Isn't that what we're asking the investigative journalists to do? That applies to us too.


-- Diane J. Squire (, December 16, 1998.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ