Don't change the subject line, please!

On Mon, 04 Aug 2003 20:48:42 +0200, Toke Nørby
found these unused words floating about:

J. A. Mc. wrote:

While I'm not defending a refusal to remove portions of posts entered
in a newsgroup and used elsewhere ... netiquette says that any post
placed on a newsgroup or bulletin board is a public document UNLESS an
explicit notice of copyright and/or refusal to reuse is made/attached.

That's a bit strange to me but I have found that notice too. Actually
I could imagine that this is a kind of agreement between some people
who were involved in maintaining the news groups and not lawyers. If
Perry Mason had a "news group case" of some kind I'm sure that he
would find that a posting is copyrighted according to the law no
matter if there is a copyright notice or not.

Anyway. Thanks for this!

I guess that would be subject to each country's laws, but a NG and a
BB have long been determined to be an "open public forum" and thus not
copyrightable in the US.

From: "Alan"
Organization: BigPond Internet Services
Reply-To: "Alan"
Newsgroups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 22:27:56 GMT
Subject: On Humor and Insinuations. Was: Don't change the subject
line, please!

Can I ask where this tiresome discourse is going. It has absolutely nothing
to do with stamps,
stamp collecting or anything else philatelic?

Agreed. Some members of this newsgroup are not well-known for giving up the
flogging of dead horses, but perhaps we can prevail on them to show us they
really do collect stamps.

In my previous post about homosexuality on stamps, I have attempted to
introduce a new topic. (Victor, you do not have my permission to post my
words -- ever -- on your web site.)

Bob Ingraham

On Mon, 04 Aug 2003 20:58:32 +0200, Toke Nørby
found these unused words floating about:

"Victor Manta" wrote:

OK - then one last comment from me.

BTW, Toke, I have written to Mr. Kiddle in the name of the PWO, and I have
asked him for an official answer concerning the Critiques. I have told him
that his answer will be published on the PWO site, what I have also done.
Therefore I haven't published a *private* e-mail, as you have stated, but an
official one, which makes a big difference.
..snip

Typical! - as Mette said: "you have a god-given talent for turning
things upside down": What you tell him is *not* the same as his
permission/accept.

But - again - you are *not* correct: you haven't even told him that
you intended to publish his e-mails on your web-pages (I told you that
I have copies of all your mails to him).

That seems to be a very big breach of privacy in 'sharing' emails.

Those -are- considered to be private communications! Did VM give
persmission for Mr. Kiddle to make the public - even to one other
person is 'publicising'.

Pot = Kettle ?

On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 23:52:05 +0100, "David F."
found these unused words floating about:

snip

Sorry, I cannot cite the posting, because it was copyrighted. And because I
don't see it, I cannot answer it either, because I have forgotten what was
it above :-)))

Victor Manta


How does "Google" stand on this, as they seem to have an archive
of every NG posting on the planet!

David.

NG = Open Public Forum - archivable and quotable. IIRC there was a
test case early in the life of the 'net'.

E-Mail - Private - subject to penalties for un authorized disclosure.
SPAM/Commercial excepted.

J. A. Mc. wrote:
NG = Open Public Forum - archivable and quotable. IIRC there was a
test case early in the life of the 'net'.

Do you have a cite for that? Not doubting you, I would really like to
know about this. And see for myself just what it covers.

= Eric

"Alan" wrote:

Can I ask where this tiresome discourse is going. It has absolutely nothing
to do with stamps, stamp collecting or anything else philatelic?
...snip

"Some" postings back I have agreed that I would very much like this
"endless discussion" to be closed. I'm happy that we now know a way to
protect our postings for being used on private web sites without our
permission. That's great!

Let's get back to stamps!
--
Mvh Toke
http://www.norbyhus.dk/
Copyright by Toke Nørby :-)

.......overheard at my last cannabis hearing,

"You're a high priced lawyer! If I give you $500, will
you answer 2 questions for me?"

"Absolutely! what's the second question?"

Douglas MYALL wrote:


Didier Maistre
wrote in
article ...
Hello there,
(...)
Best and respectful regards to all,

--
Didier Maistre

Chinese stamps collector

Well said Pierre!

BTW, I thought you were French, not Chinese.

Douglas

Hello Blair .... huhhh ... Douglas !
;-))

I am not Pierre, I am Didier.
I am french indeed, as well as Pierre.
I am a french collector of chinese stamps.

Best regards,

Didier Maistre

french collector of chinese stamps




.-=( Sent from: http://www.delcampe.com/usenet_index.php?language=F )=-.

On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 09:00:57 +0200, Toke Nørby
found these unused words floating about:

"Alan" wrote:

Can I ask where this tiresome discourse is going. It has absolutely nothing
to do with stamps, stamp collecting or anything else philatelic?
..snip

"Some" postings back I have agreed that I would very much like this
"endless discussion" to be closed. I'm happy that we now know a way to
protect our postings for being used on private web sites without our
permission. That's great!

Let's get back to stamps!

Then you should add something along the lines of:

"No permission for reposting or reuse outside the posted NG is
granted." to the 'sig'.

Bob Ingraham wrote:

(snip)

(Victor, you do not have my permission to post my
words -- ever -- on your web site.)

That goes for me, also.

--
John Ray, London UK.

Mail to mefp49 is unlikely to be read. I can be contacted at xcf70 (same
ISP).