[WikiEN-l] Subscription idea

[WJhonson at aol.com]

<<In a message dated 12/26/2008 11:33:04 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
mbimmler at gmail.com writes:

"I  believe if you look into JSTOR's pre-1928
documents, you will immediately  find that they are assessing dubious
copyright" and "Could you elaborate on  this and supply a specific
example?" could be formed in much nicer  words>>
-----------------
 
Although if you look at the history of this thread, you will see that I did  
ask for a specific example.
Now that we know of this non-issue let's explore it a bit more.
IF I take a photograph, or even "digitize" (scan) a print document, I own  
the copyright to what *I* have done.
That does *not* give me an automatic copyright to the underlying work *of  
someone else* and this is the key point here.
 
If I take a picture of the Declaration of Independence under glass at the  
National Archives, I gain a copyright to my image.  That does NOT give me a  
copyright to the actual underlying document that I've imaged.  If I take a  
picture of the Lincoln Memorial, I gain a copyright to my image.  Not to  the item 
imaged.
 
My copyright to my image whether paper or digital, whether glossy, flat, or  
airbrushed.  Any derivative work based substantially on my image, in such a  
way as to deprive me of income from my image, etc etc etc.
 
This, as I'm sure we're all aware, does not, in any way, prevent anyone  from 
taking SAID image (even), extracting all the text from it, and then  
presenting it as the original PD document (in plain text not as an image).
 
SHOULD you not be so lazy as to actually get your own copy of said original  
PD document, I'm sure you'll sleep much sounder.
I however won't be limited by that level of silliness.
 
Now can we move on?
 
Will Johnson
 
 
 
**************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, 
Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. 
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000025)