Re: request

[James Miller <jamiller@cyberdude.com>]

Sam,

What's your support for this again?  Publication establishes protectability.

The Hemmingway estate case essentially holds against your proposition.  The
court held that if Hemmingway had "set off" his comments in some way in talking
to a biographer--maybe air quotes or something..--then he could have protected
his comments otherwise nada protection...

Unpublished works that are communicated aren't afforded any special protection. 
If they are communicated in a way that would constitute an implied license
there will be no infringement even if they are deemed protectable.

Additionally, the point of attachment is not limited to where the archives
are stored--although this hasn't been widely litigated yet, huh.. ;)

Keep in mind protection is a reward for publication.  Common law copyright
protections and limited publications are legal fictions.
> sam th --- sam@uchicago.edu
> Note that in the US, where the debian archives are located, this is
> not actually true.  You can't prevent people from recording it (since
> recording in a public space is legal), but your _expression_ is
> copyrighted, and you have not published it by yelling it.  So if they
> try to distribute it to their friends, you could prosecute them for
> copyright infringement.
>