From: "rp henry"
Subject: Re: Human Experimentation : Civil, Criminal, Constitutional ? : It is still going on.
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 07:57:49 -0800
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4
John Woodgate wrote in message <+ee6RoANyc49EwKf@jmwa.demon.co.uk>...
>I read in sci.electronics.design that News2020 wrote
>(in ) about
>'Human Experimentation : Civil, Criminal, Constitutional ? : It is still
>going on.', on Mon, 25 Nov 2002:
>>To answer your query, I do not see any issues at all in copying relevant
>>portions in a reply.
>Well, there is; copyright law is quite explicit in this case. Your
>statements are equivalent to granting a general public license to quote
>your texts in reply to your posts but not to use them to defame you.
>That may be the most sensible thing you have produced in a long time.
My opinion is quite different. Copyright law quite explicitly allows as
"fair use" the attributed quotation of relevant text to facilitate comment
or critique, even parody. You can look it up, all US Code is on the web:
If I remember correctly, fair use is defined in section 107.
You can of course pursue expensive (to you) litigation if you feel your
rights have been violated. Even if you were to "win" against a copycat, the
best you could hope for would be an acknowledgement of your ownership of the
material, and/or possibly a restraining order against future violations,
since there is no reasonable expectation of making any profit by use of the
text in question.