If this is true (and I'm not contesting it, just wondering), then once the
author's work has been distributed even once (and presumably registered, in
the case of US citizens) the author then must "actively profit" from the
work or not need copyright protection?
So if I publish a register a photograph as copyrighted, have it published
even once (now others have it in one shape/form or another), decide later
that the content troubles me to the point that I don't want it published
again, and stop making efforts to "actively profit" from this image's
publication, that simply because another person that wishes to publish this
image because they value it and have some sort of copy of it, that I should
not have the ability to refuse/prohibit/prevent further publication?
Note that I understand that I do have this right under US copyright law but
I think that you're saying that I should not have it. Do I understand you
accurately Eric?
cheers from my sewing machine,
ken Whitcomb
> From: "Eric L. Strobel" <fyzycyst_at_home.com>
>
> What I take from that is that when
> someone is no longer actively profiting from their work (whether by choice
> or through the march of time), then the entire reason for the copyright is
> gone.
-- This is the Newtontalk mailinglist - http://www.newtontalk.net To unsubscribe or manage: visit the above link or mailto:newtontalk-request_at_newtontalk.net?Subject=unsubscribe
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Wed Oct 03 2001 - 12:01:26 EDT