Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Was\s+NEW\s+AHCUSA\,\s+now\s+copyrights\s*$/: 6 ]

Total 6 documents matching your query.

1. Was NEW AHCUSA, now copyrights (score: 1)
Author: Unknown
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 16:53:09 -0800
You don't get a copyright simply because you post, say, or write something original, no matter how valuable it may be. Copyrights in a particular work must be applied for, and when the copyright ter
/html/spridgets/2000-02/msg00447.html (8,992 bytes)

2. Re: Was NEW AHCUSA, now copyrights (score: 1)
Author: Unknown
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 20:50:12 -0500charset="iso-8859-1"
Is this international law, or US law? ( or does it matter? ) I was under the impression that copyright was more 'implied', but that proving it might pose a problem, unless you formalized it. But, the
/html/spridgets/2000-02/msg00453.html (9,678 bytes)

3. Re: Was NEW AHCUSA, now copyrights (score: 1)
Author: Unknown
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 22:26:26 -0500charset="koi8-r"
Geez....Pardon me, but what the Hell has happened to this list while I was Is this really, really important????? I don't get it! Maybe I'm missing something. I'm certain l still have my original "Wel
/html/spridgets/2000-02/msg00459.html (7,260 bytes)

4. Re: Was NEW AHCUSA, now copyrights (score: 1)
Author: Unknown
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2000 09:01:59 -0500
This isn't true anymore. From the US Copyright Office's web site: Copyright protection subsists from the time the work is created in fixed form. The copyright in the work of authorship immediately be
/html/spridgets/2000-02/msg00477.html (9,736 bytes)

5. Re: Was NEW AHCUSA, now copyrights (score: 1)
Author: Unknown
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2000 09:41:01 -0500
Very interesting. I will be reviewing the archives to see who has ever copied my messages in their replies and sending an appropriate bill for use of my "work". :-) Hmmm, that next project just got
/html/spridgets/2000-02/msg00480.html (7,436 bytes)

6. Re: Was NEW AHCUSA, now copyrights (score: 1)
Author: Unknown
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2000 12:16:20 -0600
Won't work Jay, there is an inherent flaw in your plan. We have to have your to send the royalty check to!!!! Are you willing to give up your witness protection status for a few bucks?? Brad
/html/spridgets/2000-02/msg00494.html (8,019 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu