GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2001-04 > 0988246937


From: (Reedpcgen)
Subject: Re: COPYRIGHT on posts
Date: 26 Apr 2001 01:02:17 GMT
References: <O9fOaJezAHA.83@cpmsnbbsa07>


>Subject: Re: End of Tomlinson/ COPYRIGHT on posts
>From: "D. Spencer Hines"
>Date: 4/25/01 5:48 PM Mountain Daylight Time
>Message-id: <>
>
>Perhaps Mr. Finton sees this current "Tomlinson/Dudley/Bagley"
>discussion as simply a "continuation" of the previous "Dudley/Bagley"
>discussion.

No, it was made explicitly clear that he was only allowed to publish those
three things, and only what had been posted UP TO that date.

>
>If he did make such a contract with Paul C. Reed and Stewart Baldwin not
>to publish what they post to SGM without their explicit permission, it
>appears that said agreement does not extend to OTHER posters to SGM or
>to ANY posts to SHM ---- useful Medieval Genealogical and Historical
>information also appears on that newsgroup.
>

Part of the discussion on this group were comments by members with legal
experience that stated we should all be covered. In my negotiation with Ken, I
thought rather than pushing him into a psychological corner, I should
explicitly ask for my material and extended it to Steward as well so that there
would at least be precedence for others concerned.

>Is this alleged "contract" in writing and notarised ---- or is it just a
>telephone conversation ---- with no permanent record, just the memories
>of the participants to rely on?
>--
>
>D. Spencer Hines
>

It is not signed and notarized. It is an oral contract, and I also had Ken
agree to post publicly that he agreed to my stipulations on this group, which
though not signed were sent by him from his computer at his house.
I did not at that time intend to take legal action, thinking that when push
came to shove, Ken would honor his word. He does publish a magazine that
specializes in this area for which he receives monetary compensation from
subscribers. I am not paid by any of the journals which have published my
articles. That is a matter of scholarship, ethics and pride of workmanship and
discovery.

I would think that Ken would also take pride in his publication and how he goes
about things. I leave it to him to comment on his policies.

I am friends with a number of the scholars who have allowed him to reprint
articles they wrote elsewhere. I don't think they would take kindly to a man
who swipes intellectual material against a friend and colleague's wishes. That
is not how publishing in respectable journals is done.

Paul C. Reed

This thread: