"Erwin S. Andreasen" <erwin@andreasen.com> writes:
> On Thu, 18 Jun 1998, Chuck Carson wrote:
> > what goes into getting these. You do not just say your shit is
> > copyrighted or has a license, software companies pay _BIG_
> > money to lawyers to get these drafted and _OFFICIAL_. My
>
> Most of your mail is wrong. If your fiance has some other sources to the
> claims you present here, I'd love to see them.
You saved me a huge reply here, Erwin. Thank you for doing my work
for me :)
A while back I found a very interesting piece of email from a mailing
list from the company that hosts my mud. It had a lot of neat details
regarding copyrights and muds. I'll post it here if anyone would like
that (it's fairly lengthy and might need splitting into two parts).
> > Yea, I know copyrights are cheap (especially the 'poor mans')
> > but about the only mud related thing you could probably copyright
> > and expect to be able to do any stable defenses of, is a mud name.
>
> See #6 in that FAQ. You can't copyright names. See also:
>
> http://www.templetons.com/brad/copyright.html
>
> on info about what you CAN copyright.
He is probably thinking of trademarks instead of copyrights. People
tend to muddle trademarks, copyrights, and patents.
--
James Turner turnerjh@xtn.net
http://www.vuse.vanderbilt.edu/~turnerjh/
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/15/00 PST