|
Hello,
If someone sends you an email, is there any legal reason you cannot
forward it to others? For instance, as Dr. Laura says (whether you
like her or not) "If you send it to me, it's mine to do with as I
please." Is that legally true?
Is there any recourse the original sender has to prevent anyone from
forwarding it?
Thanks,
T. Wynne
|
| |
| |
On 5 Sep 2004 15:03:57 -0700, 000@mindless.com (Tyrone Wynne)
Hello,
If someone sends you an email, is there any legal reason you cannot
forward it to others? For instance, as Dr. Laura says (whether you
like her or not) "If you send it to me, it's mine to do with as I
please." Is that legally true?
Why wouldn't it be?
Unless you're talking about something that is by law confidential (e.g.
patient-doctor, lawyer-client, or insider-trading information), why
wouldn't they be able to share it?
Is there any recourse the original sender has to prevent anyone from
forwarding it?
Thanks,
T. Wynne
--
There's no way to delay that trouble comin' everyday
|
| |
| |
000@mindless.com (Tyrone Wynne) wrote in message news:<d60c3e0e.0409051403.397ed7f@posting.google.com>...
Hello,
If someone sends you an email, is there any legal reason you cannot
forward it to others? For instance, as Dr. Laura says (whether you
like her or not) "If you send it to me, it's mine to do with as I
please." Is that legally true?
Is there any recourse the original sender has to prevent anyone from
forwarding it?
The answer is, like most things in the law: it depends. Your question
is way too vague to be properly answered. Is there defamation
involved? Is there a contractual relationship involved? The devil's in
the details.
|
| |
| |
Tyrone Wynne wrote:
If someone sends you an email, is there any legal reason you cannot
forward it to others?
Technically, yes. It's still a copyright violation.
As for damages:
None. Zilch. Zero. Since Dr. Laura could describe it to
another person, or the whole word, as long as it isn't
quoted, there seems no possible additional damages from
quoting it.
|
| |
| |
"Arthur L. Rubin" <ronnirubin@sprintmail.com> wrote in message news:<413E145A.AB4F00CC@sprintmail.com>...
Tyrone Wynne wrote:
Technically, yes. It's still a copyright violation.
As for damages:
None. Zilch. Zero. Since Dr. Laura could describe it to
another person, or the whole word, as long as it isn't
quoted, there seems no possible additional damages from
quoting it.
It is absurd, and wrong, to suggest that every single time someone
forwards an email it constitutes a "copyright violation."
|
| |
| |
cbreitel wrote:
It is absurd, and wrong, to suggest that every single time someone
forwards an email it constitutes a "copyright violation."
It may be absurd, but it's not wrong -- unless permission is
given.
|
| |
| |
"Arthur L. Rubin" <ronnirubin@sprintmail.com> wrote in message news:<4140A6AD.84D121FC@sprintmail.com>...
cbreitel wrote:
It may be absurd, but it's not wrong -- unless permission is
given.
It is both absurd and wrong. An email has to be copyrightable, AND a
properly registered work with the Copyright Office in order to give
rise to an infringement claim, and even if it is copyrightable AND
registered AND the author of the email has provided notice of his
email's copyright status (and has not waived any of his rights by
freely distributing his supposedly copyrighted work to email
recipients without pre-existing licensing arrangements), the
recipient's act of forwarding the email must itself be an
infringement.
So again: absurd. Wrong.
|
| |
| |
cbreitel wrote:
"Arthur L. Rubin" <ronnirubin@sprintmail.com> wrote in message news:<4140A6AD.84D121FC@sprintmail.com>...
It is both absurd and wrong. An email has to be copyrightable, AND a
properly registered work with the Copyright Office in order to give
rise to an infringement claim, and even if it is copyrightable AND
registered AND the author of the email has provided notice of his
email's copyright status (and has not waived any of his rights by
freely distributing his supposedly copyrighted work to email
recipients without pre-existing licensing arrangements), the
recipient's act of forwarding the email must itself be an
infringement.
So again: absurd. Wrong.
What is absurd is your post.
In order for there to be a violation of copyright law:
The email has to be copyrightable, which requires very little
content or originality. Even my quote above:
It may be absurd, but it's not wrong -- unless permission is
given.
is copyrightable, although someone could easily produce
it independently.
.... a properly registered work ....
True. Registration is required before damages can be collected,
and probably before suit can be filed. If registration is
not done within 3 months of publication, statuatory damages
cannot be collected, but only actual damages. (Which, I
claim, does not include damages from publication of the
information contained in the post, but only damages from
publication of the post itselt.)
.... the author of the email has provided notice of his
.... email's copyright status ...
Not at all necessary, in any country complying with the Berne
Convention. Your "licensing" clause is bogus as well. You
might as well state that if I were to send copies of a
manuscript to a "friend" for review, he could then publish
it under his own name.
And the act of forwarding the email creates a copy, which
is an act reserved to the copyright holder under the law.
A court could rule that forwarding the E-mail, and NOT
retaining a copy, would not be "creating a copy" in
equity, but it is "creating a copy" in law.
Now, you COULD make a "fair use" claim. You haven't tried
that.
|
| |
| |
"Arthur L. Rubin" <ronnirubin@sprintmail.com> wrote in message news:<41421FC4.A6244BCC@sprintmail.com>...
Now, you COULD make a "fair use" claim. You haven't tried
that.
I don't have to. The burden in an infringement action rests on the
plaintiff, not the defendant, and fair use is just one of numerous
reasons why your statement that every forwarded email constitutes a
copyright violation is incorrect.
|
| |
| |
cbreitel wrote:
"Arthur L. Rubin" <ronnirubin@sprintmail.com> wrote in message news:<41421FC4.A6244BCC@sprintmail.com>...
I don't have to. The burden in an infringement action rests on the
plaintiff, not the defendant, and fair use is just one of numerous
reasons why your statement that every forwarded email constitutes a
copyright violation is incorrect.
"Fair use" is an affirmative defense. It also clearly
DOES NOT apply to forwarding E-mails.
I agree that, because copyright violation is (usually) civil,
and that statutory damages are not assessable unless the
copyright is registered within 3 months of creation, and
there are almost certainly no actual damages, no one
in their right mind (this excludes Ray) would sue you for
the copyright violation. Nonetheless, it IS a clear copyright
violation, and if someone wanted to go to the effort to prove
a point, they could get civil damages of a penny or two, at
the cost of thousands of dollars in legal fees.
|
| |
| |
|
