[TowerTalk] Re: Copy Right Legalities

K7GCO@aol.com K7GCO@aol.com
Sat, 26 Feb 2000 03:36:10 EST


  In previous post the 1st paragraph was apparently to wide (same one I always
  use) and produced shorten and uneven sentences which it doesn't always do.  
 
  Someone recommended immediately reducing the width and trying again.  I
  thank you.  I tested it to him and it worked.  Please discard previous 
E-mail. 
 This a cleaner presentation. 
 
  W A N T E D:  ATTORNEY HAM OF AT LEAST 25 YEARS, HIGHLY
  EXPERIENCED IN COPY RIGHT, PATENT LAW AND MOLE HILL
  MOUNTAIN CLIMBING, TO GIVE PRO BONO LAW OPINION (FREE)
  ON TT OF MATTER TAKING UP TT SPACE THAT SHOULD BE USED
  FOR AIRING USUAL BUT VERY USEFUL BAND-AIDS FOR
  DEFICIENTLY DESIGNED EQUIPMENT AND OTHER VERY USEFUL
  CORRECTIVE AND LONGEVITY CONCEPTS WE ALL LOVE TO USE. 
  IF POSTS BELOW AREN'T ENOUGH BAD EVIDENCE, THE REST
  CAN BE SUBPOENAED.  IN APPRECIATION, TT HAMDUMB--
  (CORRECTION) HAMDOOM--HAMDOME--HAMDOM (TAKE YOUR
  PICK) WILL PROVIDE PRO-BONO TECHNICAL (FREE TECHNICAL 
  ADVICE, ALUMINUM TUBING LIKE--6' x3/4"x.058"--OTHER PARTS
  AND OTHER ASSISTANCE IF CLOSE) TO YOU IN EXCHANGE. 
  CERTAIN OF US WOULD EVEN APPEAR AS TECHNICAL
  WITNESSES IN COURT FOR YOU IF EVER NEEDED.  (WE
  UNDERSTAND IF YOU WOULD PREFER TO DECLINE OUR 
  OFFER--PARTICULARLY FOR COURT).  WE MUST SOLVE THIS
  MONUMENTAL LEGAL COPYRIGHT MOLE HILL MADE TO A 
  MOUNTAIN PROBLEM AND WILL ALSO TELL NO MORE  LAWYER
  JOKES IF YOU SOLVE THE PROBLEM.  OTHER LAWYERS 
  WILL LOVE YOU.  IF YOU DON'T WE WILL CONTINUE AND TELL 
  EVEN MORE DUMB LAWYER JOKES.  SUCH A DEAL!    
  (Why can't all the collective expertise on TT solve this simple legal 
  problem?  Why don't we ask those who know when we don't--I even do that?  
If 
  there is an Attorney Ham that reads this--why hasn't he volunteered advice? 
  Maybe there is a reason? K7GCO)
  
         In a message dated 25.02.00 05:56:39 Pacific Standard Time, 
  Jan.E.Holm@telia.se writes:<< 
         How can the physical dimensions of an antenna be
         copyrighted, please explain.  I still insist, by the same token, 
         taking a picture of  the same antenna must then be illegal.
         Also I insist, if I hypothecicaly would build an EXACT
         copy of an C31XR I might be walking on thin ice. 
         However I think it´s OK if I do so and only have it for
         personal use. If I make an EXACT copy and start to
         sell it I´m sure Force12 would sue me. In this case the above 
         wasn´t the issue. YU1AO only published a file with dimensions 
         for a C31XR and that surely cannot violate the copyright laws. 
         That's the BS old chap and no I don´t have to wish you 73 either
         but since I´m a lot nicer then you I still will so a big
         73 to you old chap.   de Jim SM2EKM
   ------------------------------------
   -----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
   Från:  davidw@copper.net [SMTP:davidw@copper.net]
   Skickat:    den 25 februari 2000 12:48
   Till:  Jan.E.Holm@telia.se
   Ämne:  RE: [TowerTalk] Re: C31XR?FINAL
   Look, 'Jim':   
         What the YU published was copyrighted. *That's* what's at issue, so 
   your bombast is, as before, continuation of an attempt to defend the
   indefensible. I quote the last paragraph of your intemperate response: "So 
   you see most of what you have been writing in this matter is *nothing* 
like 
    pure BS." (emphasis mine). Yes, you're correct: no BS from this end.
   
   BTW, your post puts me in company I admire.  Did you forget to include 
   that response as well?  *no* 73   K3BH 
   
   <<Fil: RE_ [TowerTalk] Re_ C31XR_FINAL.TXT>> 
  

--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com
Search:                   http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm