Remember it is **not a fact** that usenet is "public domain".

Even mighty *google* backed down from the threat of legal action
rather that attempt a defense when they refused to honor an XNA
requests.

In article <9dhqv350l0pv8hhoibvidm84j27nu439ep@4ax.com>,
Hatunen <hatunen@cox.net> wrote:

Should add that it would be a good idea to consult an
intellectual property attorney. By the simple act of posting to
Usenet you are implicitly accepting that your words will appear
in many places and I don't reckon it's been established yet how
freely they may be quoted in other parts of the Internet.

Especially since Usenet and the Internet are not the same
thing. In fact when Usenet started is was mostly distributed
via uucp over modems.

I'd hazard a guess that almost 100% of Usenet traffic is over the
Internet these days, though.

I'd hazard a guess that almost 100% of Usenet traffic is over the
Internet these days, though.

That almost amounts to a challenge to set up a non-internet

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 19:42:09 -0700, Bob Officer
bobofficers@127.0.0.7> wrote:

On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 15:41:46 -0700, in sci.geo.earthquakes, Hatunen
hatunen@cox.net> wrote:

On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 15:21:44 -0700, Bob Officer
bobofficers@127.0.0.7> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 04:35:16 GMT, in sci.geo.earthquakes, Skywise
into@oblivion.nothing.com> wrote:

Bob Officer <bobofficers@127.0.0.7> wrote in
news:evddv31t5oiuhdijlc2lrdssmq21jcjsup@4ax.com:

A few years back I traced down some of these usenet articles which
were used as content fodder. One *site* they were used as if they
were posted to a private forum. It took four days and a DMCA demand
latter to shut the site down.

The file of Kook Letters was funny.

Another site, was going to take me to court claiming usenet is all
public domain. The site owners own lawyer wrote the letter offering a
settlement the next day.

A third site was using the edited articles, often changing the
complete meaning. The site is now missing completely.

Bob, what's the legal precedent for this?

I'm not contradicting your position, just wanting to learn.

basic copyright and the DMCA.

All you need to do is word the DMCA demand letter correctly and show
you are the rightfully owner. Since usenet is not public domain, it
is completely copyright by the writer of the words..

The user then has to show he has right to use the work on his web
pages to his provider. It is easiest when there is no route to the
usenet from the private web forums.

Should add that it would be a good idea to consult an
intellectual property attorney. By the simple act of posting to
Usenet you are implicitly accepting that your words will appear
in many places and I don't reckon it's been established yet how
freely they may be quoted in other parts of the Internet.

If one posts on usenet, it is an understanding that ones words are
permitted to be retransmitted by NNTP/UUpc to other usenet servers
for display and read, and so other may comment.

There is no understanding that one will see one's work used to
populate a web page, or a private forum, with no usenet connection or
no "comment" by the person using your usenet articles.

So one might think, but given the current patterns of usage on
the Internet, that remains to be adjudicated. I repeat, "I don't
reckon it's been established yet how freely they may be quoted in
other parts of the Internet"

I do know of several Usenet posters who use a copyright claim
with grants as their sig.

( I understand
part of Google's TOS releases ones copyright to them in exchange for
posting rights). In one of the cases I mention the forum owner tried
to misrepresent the posting were all his private forum.

Remember it is **not a fact** that usenet is "public domain".

I didn't say it was, nor did I say anything implying that.

In article <bp70041vlunrkb4ih89iikmkrfrov4r9m8@4ax.com>,
Bob Officer <bobofficer@127.0.0.7> wrote:

Remember it is **not a fact** that usenet is "public domain".

No, it's almost impossible to release work the the public
domain these days. The best one can to is license it.

Even mighty *google* backed down from the threat of legal action
rather that attempt a defense when they refused to honor an XNA
requests.

Cite?