🚀 go-pugleaf

From article <EMV.91Jun25142055@bronte.aa.ox.com>,
by emv@msen.com (Ed Vielmetti):
> <excerpt> <msgid> OZ.91Jun25014110@ursa.ccs.yorku.ca </msgid>
> oz@ursa.ccs.yorku.ca (Ozan Yigit) writes:
> 
>    Now, there is no need to bother even in the US, as per
>    Geneva convention, all articles are implicitly copyright by their
>    authors.  I think the implications of this for any "derivative
>    works" such as the article contents of comp.archives is reasonably
>    clear.
> 
> </excerpt> <para>
> I don't think it's clear at all, and I resent your implications that
> comp.archives is just a rebroadcasting service.  I add a significant
> amount of value, not only in the selection and presentation of the
> materials, but also in the verification and categorization of articles
> as they come out.  ...
>
But isn't that what happens in *every* moderated news group?  If not, just
how is it different?  And if it does, why aren't all the other moderators
doing, or at least talking about doing, what you propose?

Vivek Kalra
-- 
vk@honasa.att.com      |
                       |      I didn't do it!!
:r ~/.disclaimer       |                   -- Anonymous (tm)