The message 4258366A.2030202@hippygeek.co.uk from Ben Francis lists@hippygeek.co.uk contains these words:
MJ Ray wrote:
I remind people that whole-quoting may even be a breach of copyright in some cases (albeit minor), while quoting a small amount for commentary or criticism is fair dealing.
If items are sent to a list, the sender accepts the norms of that medium, and has no redress against quoting or overquoting on that list.
To take that material *OUTSIDE* the list without express leave of the originator is not good manners, and *MIGHT* amount to an infringement of copyright, and certainly passing it off as your own work is an infringement.
(However, I wouldn't think that a mistake in attributions could be a matter which couldn't summarily be covered by an apology.)
Hmm. Surely downloading the message from your mail server is technically making a full copy of the author's original work without their express consent, as is reading a web page which gets copied into your cache.
I wouldn't have thought so, under any normal circumstances. You post, you send to a list and you put up a website knowing that this is how software handles them.
IMHO this is far too ambiguous to be seriously considered as infringing Copyright, if you send an email to a mailing list you've got to expect this kind of behaviour. Having said that, I hardly make a secret about my opinions on the flaws of Copyright law when applied to modern digital mediums.
The laws are pretty woolly until fraud can be demonstrated, then they are quite unambiguous.
In Mercadia, Jeremy James has been given a nine year prison sentence for sending up to 10,000,000 porn and fraudulent spam items *A DAY* over a long period.
He's out on bail pending an appeal, but it isn't thought likely to succeed. (BBC R4 Today program)