Re: GZG and Copyright

At 11:16 AM 1/31/97 +0000, you wrote:
>Now I'm admining this list there's somethinG I have to clear up..
>
>What was the exact decision regarding having representatives from GZG
on
>this list? Obviously, with all the extra rules, timelines etc that get 
>posted there's a possibility of someone taking out legal action if 
>something similar gets into a future GZG product. 

I don't think there was any kind of consensus. It was my wife's feeling
(and
her boss') that you can't lose your copyright implicitly, just as you
can't
implicitly lose any right codified in law. You can write something and
say,
"Hey, anyone can use this, I'm putting this in the public domain."
However,
you don't lose copyright to something you wrote even if it's posted to a
mailing list that says, "Everything you post here is property of GZG."

Hard copy publications always cover themselves with explicit
instructions
from the author. For instance, I had a letter to the Canadian edition of
TV
Guide published. Even though I sent a letter to them by e-mail, they
phoned
me up asking for EXCPLICIT instructions allowing them to print the
letter.

The problem is that there is very little precedence for copyright and
mailing lists. All a mailing list does is redirect a message with no
editorial content added. This SEEMS to give it even less protection than
a
printed magazine or book, neither of which can simply state, "We have
the
right to print anything you might send us and you lose your copyright."
It's
also almost impossible to argue in court. All the person holding the
copyright has to do is say, "I typed in the wrong nickname and sent it
to
the list. I didn't realize it went to the list until I saw it in Jon
Tuffley's supplement." 

On the other hand, we could all send messages, or write sigs, that
explicitly gives Jon the right to copy anthing we post. But, what
happens if
someone posts, "Jon can copy this message if he gives me proper credit,"
and
the proper credit isn't given (such as Jon maybe forgetting who came up
with
the idea). 

This is all a non-issue anyway, because you CAN'T COPYRIGHT GAME RULES!
You
can copyright the specific expression of a rule, but you can't copyright
a
rule itself. So, if I come up with a great new set of rules for cloaking
devices (which I DID when I first came on the list, by the way :-)  )
and
Jon uses it, as long as he rewords it, it isn't a violation of my
copyright.
So, Jon can use our ideas all he wants, because you can't copyright an
idea,
only the specific expression of that idea.

"Let me explain. No, there is no time. Let me sum up." None of us
posting
can implicitly lose our copyright. That being said, you can't copyright
a
game rule, just the way you explain that rule. Jon can freely use the
ideas
posted in this forum, with or without an implicitly stated loss of
rights.

This is true of Canada, the United States, Great Britain, and the other
nations that belong to the Berne Convention for copyright. 

Allan Goodall:	agoodall@sympatico.ca 
"You'll want to hear about my new obsession.
 I'm riding high upon a deep depression. 
 I'm only happy when it rains."    - Garbage