The Smoking Gun

-- a (a@a.a), March 26, 1999

Answers

a, regardless, the April 1999 issue of Wired has the best Y2K articles to date of any mainstream magazine. One of the Y2K questions that Ed Yourdon entertained last night at the end of his presentation in D.C. was, "Why doesn't Silicon Valley 'get it'?" Those folks do read Wired.

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), March 26, 1999.

a --- more evidence not needed.

Jack --- What was Ed's response?

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), March 26, 1999.

While nobody would dispute the claim that Declan is an ass, I doubt he has much control over the copyright policies of Wired magazine.

-- Blue Himalayan (bh@k2.y), March 26, 1999.

Let's hear from Declan on this. What's the big officious deal re Gary North posting the article? Especially considering that he provides click-through and could easily just add a "copyright notice"...

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.com), March 26, 1999.

There's a lot of info re copyright on the Web. Here's the crux of it, something I wrote for another forum. But please note I am not a lawyer and cannot give legal advice.

"Q. What about the Fair Use doctrine?

A. Four factors determine whether use of material is fair use: 1. If the material has been significantly altered or appeals to a diferent audience, it is likely to be included under fair use. 2. If the material is for nonprofit or educational purposes, it is likely to be considered fair use.

3. Unpublished works are more likely to fall under the Fair Use doctrine.

4. If the portion used is likely to affect the fair market value of the work, it will likely be ruled not fair use."

There's much more to the subject, but the Fair Use doctrine seems to govern most decisions.

I didn't see the original North post but if less than a "substantial" portion was used or if there was a good amount of summarizing and paraphrasing, it would seem that North is not in violation of Fair Use. But again, I am not a lawyer so don't quote me on any of this.

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), March 26, 1999.