[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[at-l] Re: (no subject)

In a message dated 4/13/2005 6:44:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
rcli4@comcast.net writes:
Daniel Chazin (I think that is his name) was on the list at that time.  If 
you serch the archives I think you will find his response.  Neither Wingfoot, 
Wingy, or Mr. Bruce stole anything. 
Actually Clyde, an archive search will show that Daniel (aka DataBook '97) 
and Brian King of the ATC both said that Wingy did not have permission to copy 
the DataBook's format. 
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
In a message dated 2/11/03 4:01:52 PM Eastern Standard Time,
bushwackerfish@mindspring.com writes:

> Who owns the copyright to the 2003 Databook?
> If Wingfoot has permission in writing to use the material then all
> this BS discussion is over with.
> If he doesn't - then it's up to the copyright holder to to enforce the

> copyright.

       The Data Book copyright is held by the Appalachian Trail
Conference. As I stated in my previous message to the list, Wingfoot has
permission to use the mileage figures in the Data Book, but does not
have permission to copy the format of the book.

       Whether what he has done is a violation of ATC's copyright is an
interesting question.  The answer is not so simple.  On the one hand,
the format Wingfoot has adopted is extremely similar to the Data Book
format -- including the use of the very same symbols to indicate
facilities along the Trail. On the other hand, some of the information
has been changed, other facilities are included, and the method of
presentation of the material is slightly different.  I'm not an expert
in copyright law, but I think, at the very least, there is a substantial
question whether ATC's copyright may have been violated.

> Either way - this doesn't seem to be an issue for the list anymore -
> it's not our fight . . . not our responsibility . . . not interesting
> anymore either.

       True, it is ATC, not the list, who decides whether any action
should be taken against Wingfoot.  But I certainly think that the issue
is appropriate for discussion on the list.  In my view, this issue is
both more relevant and more interesting than the totally-off-list topics
that account for a very substantial proportion of the messages posted to
this list.

            Daniel Chazin