From: "Ted White" <twhite8 at cox.net>
To: "WSFA members" <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Capclave
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 18:24:33 -0400
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>

----- Original Message -----
From: "dicconf" <dicconf at radix.net>
To: "WSFA members" <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 1:46 AM
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Capclave

>
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Jim Kling wrote:
>
> > Monday, October 18, 2004, 11:07:52 PM, WSFA members wrote:
> >
> > > No author wishes his work in the public domain.  To be copyrighted, a
work
> > > must have a declaration of copyright ("copyright 20-- [name]")
> >
> > No, it doesn't. According to the US Copyright Office: "Copyright is
secured automatically when the work is
> > created, and a work is "created" when it is fixed in a copy or
phonorecord for the first time." A declaration
> > of copyright certainly is not required.
>
> This, acto Jack Speer, is so-called "common law copyright" and reflects
> the position that a man's work is zis property to do with as ze wills.
If
> the work is published and distributed, then Ted's requirement applies
> unless the author actually wishes to place zis work in public domain (as
> some do).
>
> > > , and it used to be required that copies be registered with the
copyright office, but for now the
> > > declaration alone is sufficient.   Republication without including
the prior copyright notice is a violation
> > > of that copyright.
> >
> > I don't see how. See above.
>
> Distribution to anybody who wants a copy without this procedure PD's it.
> Curiously, distribution to a definite limited list -- all members of
FAPA,
> or of WSFA, or for that matter of CapClave -- does not.

Thanks.  If I read you correctly, the Capclave Program Book is in a
somewhat grey area, since copies would be available to anyone who wished to
join Capclave, rather than a pre-defined list.

I worked for a copyright lawyer a few years ago.  He's now in Dallas (Tx),
but I will email him for his thoughts.

--Ted White