Klarinet Archive - Posting 000940.txt from 1999/03

From: James.P.Reed@-----.net (James P Reed)
Subj: Re: [kl] Copyright (was [kl] Gilbert and Sullivan parody)
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 23:38:16 -0500

In response to Lelia's latest postings, Steve Goldman stated:

> Implying that Cindy was a plagiarist and questioning her morals
> tells me much more about your personality then hers.

Not only would I like to echo this but I would also like to report that
Lelia has read the same parody posting by myself and others on a variety
of newsgroups and has chosen this list to make her stand.

Lelia, why go after clarinetists when you could be going after
saxophonists and others?

Certainly, this is an issue of such paramount legal importance to Lelia
that I would think she should also post to every other newsgroup she's
on where she has read this parady so that she can quite legalisticly
stifle and police the social intercourse that goes on there as well. Oh
yes, I and anyone else who can put this in more human terms can probably
describe the need for such self-righteous policing of the Internet but
I'm not economically willing to push this far enough to face Lelia in
court, with expert witnesses, not all testifying about copyright laws,
even though Lelia has made it clear she's spoiling for legal actions.

Granted, Mark and the rest of us (hopefully) don't want copyright issues
and litigation converging on the list as a result of the postings here.
However, there are numerous other people who post to this list without
legitimate or complete references, an issue I raised with Lelia and
didn't - unfortunately at that time - see the need to cover my butt by
keeping a copy of my email to her.

Nonetheless, now that the issue is raised, Mark's anarchy has to come
crashing down and WE MUST, for the legal purposes Lelia has raised,
cover out collective butts by not allowing any postings of speculation,
heresay, or conjecture, especially ones that quote second-hand sources,
other people, or other sources of intellectual property. At the very
least, this will require a group of people who review messages and
netiquite rules such as are used on the flute list. And, the rules will
need to state, very clearly, that anybody who makes a copyright
violation will be notified the first time, warned the second time and
removed from the list the third time or something of that nature.

Are we ready and willing to do this or is maintaining an anarchy worth
the risks of not having rules addressing such serious and profound legal
violations that are made, almost daily, on this list? If you doubt me,
get a clear legal reading on this - I'll bet the possibilities for
litigation are numerous enough to shut the list down, regardless of
denial and opinions to the contrary. I'll be damned if I know for sure
but I do understand the terrorism of threats of legal action and I have
no legal and binding evidence from Lelia that what she has raised will
not drag me or anyone else her into court, if it benefits a legal action
she is pursuing. You see, she can use this list as an example of how
widespead and commonplace plagariasm on the Internet is along with how
people flagrantly violate copyright laws, even after having been duly
warned. After all, Lelia has duly warned us and we damn sure better pay
attention and respond to her every wish and command.

I only have Lelia's word that she is not currently pursuing legal
actions, at the moment, and an impression that she is a very
self-righteous and potentially vengeful individual, searching for people
to litigate herself. She's openly stated her activities along this
line, in her searches for plagiarism on the Net, yet continues to bait
people who don't know better with some of her witty postings here that
damn good and well had better not appear elsewhere, especially in a
modified form - caveat emptor turned into let the reader beware.

I'm serious about this issue raising the question of needing stringent
and enforceable rules on this list, explicitly covering any comments
made about what other people have said or anything that even remotely
implies a potential copyright violation. People can be liable for such
comments as "my teacher or band director said ...", etc. and even school
children should know about their potential liabilities for the remarks
they make. Otherwise, they probably won't grow up to be legally
responsbile adults.

Clearly, by her absence of posting these remarks to some of the other
lists/newsgroups Lelia belongs to indicates she has chosen her battle
ground and it is this list.

Will something be done to clean up and police this list or will the
silent majority prevail? And, if we ignore this issue, are we risking
being involved in some future litigation of Lelia's? Can we trust her
not to involve us as supporting evidence in one of her proposed legal
actions? After all, she has clearly stated she is searching for
possible instances of her work (email, included, I assume) with the
intent of litigating. And, after this recent warning to us about such
behavior, we - meaning the list and its members - are a prime example
which could be used in numerous different ways to substantiate whatever
points might be deemed necessary or useful by her attorney.

FWIW, some of this is parady and some of it is serious. Trouble is, I
don't necessarily know which. I just feel, IMHO, it's a kiss of death
type issue for the list that probably must be confronted and not
ignored.

I'm sure to be flamed over this! At the very least, this issue is
serious enough for me to consider sticking my head back in the ground
and bailing from every list on the Net, knowing Lelia is out there.

Jim

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org