At 03:39 PM 7/2/99 -0400, you wrote: > I have also learned that it >is improper to use this symbol unless one has registered one's >work with the >proper authority. >Thanks again, Toby Hekler Not true, Toby. Any work you create is already covered by U.S. Copyright law and you are entitled to use a copyright statement and symbol on your work -- whether you register your work or not. Please see: U.S. Copyright Office http://lcweb.loc.gov/copyright/ Specifically, see the Copyright Basics section, Circular #3, Copyright Notice: http://lcweb.loc.gov/copyright/circs/circ03.pdf Under "Use of Copyright Notice" it states: "The use of the notice is the responsibility of the copyright owner and does not require permission from, or registration with, the Copyright Office." Then under "Form of Notice" it states: "The notice for visually perceptible copies should contain three elements. They should appear together or in close proximity on the copies. The elements are: 1. The symbol... 2. The year of first publication... 3. The name of the owner of the copyright in the work... " Good luck, Cyndi

Thanks to all who replied about the copyright symbol. For those of you who didn't know how to make the symbol, you hold down the alternate button and type the numbers 0169 from the number keypad. I have also learned that it is improper to use this symbol unless one has registered one's work with the proper authority. Thanks again, Toby Hekler

I've seen a basic ASCII copyright symbol done this way: (C) Copyright 1999, Cyndi Howells. All Rights Reserved.

If I understand right what you are asking, the only code i know is this: &copy. ("and" sign type "copy" then a period all with no spaces) Erin Bradford http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~kshai

Sorry, I don't know how to make the symbol in ASCII, but according to "Copyright Basics" Circular 1, page 4: Notice of Copyright: For works first published on and after March 1, 1989, use of the copyright notice is optional, though highly recommended.... Page 5: Form of Notice for Visually Perceptible Copies 1. The Symbol C (the letter C in a circle), or the word "Copyright," or the abbreviation "Copr."; and 2. The year of first publication of the work.... 3. The name of the owner of the copyright in the work, or an abbreviation by which the name can be recognized, or a generally known alternative designation of the owner. Example: C (inside circle) 1994 John Doe You can download a copy of Copyright Basics, Circular 1 from: http://lcweb.loc.gov/copyright Cat In a message dated 7/2/99 2:24:16 AM Central Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: << Does any one know how to make the copyright symbol in ASCII? If a post to a mailgroup or even an email to someone is marked "(symbol) (writer's name) All rights reserved. No portion of this message can be reproduced without the express written permission of the author", does this statement afford the author any additional legal protection? TIA, Toby Hekler [email protected] >>

that is sufficent. Even more short one is sufficent "All Rights Reserved <year> <your name>" W. David Samuelsen Toby L Hekler wrote: > > Does any one know how to make the copyright symbol in ASCII? > > If a post to a mailgroup or even an email to someone is marked "(symbol) > (writer's name) All rights reserved. No portion of this message can be > reproduced without the express written permission of the author", does this > statement afford the author any additional legal protection? > TIA, Toby Hekler > [email protected]

Does any one know how to make the copyright symbol in ASCII? If a post to a mailgroup or even an email to someone is marked "(symbol) (writer's name) All rights reserved. No portion of this message can be reproduced without the express written permission of the author", does this statement afford the author any additional legal protection? TIA, Toby Hekler [email protected]

Steve, Your explanation of obituary submissions brings to mind an incident that occurred in Ogden, UT at the Ogden Standard Examiner. The Examiner used to allow anyone to submit obituaries until a local man opened the paper and read his own obituary! Obviously someone was sending him a message, albeit a dire one! After that incident the newspaper changed their policy and would only accept obituaries from funeral homes. Lori Laird -----Original Message----- From: Steven Coker <[email protected]> To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Date: Monday, June 28, 1999 7:48 AM Subject: Obituaries >[email protected] wrote: >> I believe obits, like everything else that has been written, are copyrighted. >> They were written by someone--either a member of the family, or most often, >> the newspaper.... > > >I've written two newspaper obituaries for close relatives. My understanding, >based on experience, about the way obituaries are done these days is something >like this. The Funeral Home requests information from the family or other >survivors regarding the deceased. The Funeral Home then, with that information, >writes an obituary using a standard format used by that Funeral Home. The >Funeral Home asks the family to approve the obituary. The Funeral Home then >submits the obituary to the newspaper for publication. > >However, I believe that the family or anyone else could prepare the obituary and >submit it directly to the newspaper for publication. But, I think that most >obituaries are submitted through the Funeral Home. I believe that newspapers >generally don't write obituaries these days. Rather, I think that they merely >report death information submitted by others. So, the Funeral Home would >probably know better than the newspaper who actually prepared any given >obituary. > >Steve Coker >http://scroots.org/ >

Hello: I wish to reprint in a family history book several articles written by a family member that appeared in a newspaper in 1890 The author died in 1898. I will cite the paper and date as the source. I will be charging for the book. As far as I have been able to ascertain, this is not an infringement of the Canadian copyright law. Am I correct in this? Any comments appreciated. John [email protected]

This makes sense to me, as I can often tell by reading the obit which funeral home it will be from. We have one particular Afro-American funeral home that writes the most beautiful obits, a real family history. Steven Coker wrote: > > [email protected] wrote: > > I believe obits, like everything else that has been written, are copyrighted. > > They were written by someone--either a member of the family, or most often, > > the newspaper.... > > I've written two newspaper obituaries for close relatives. My understanding, > based on experience, about the way obituaries are done these days is something > like this. The Funeral Home requests information from the family or other > survivors regarding the deceased. The Funeral Home then, with that information, > writes an obituary using a standard format used by that Funeral Home. The > Funeral Home asks the family to approve the obituary. The Funeral Home then > submits the obituary to the newspaper for publication. > > However, I believe that the family or anyone else could prepare the obituary and > submit it directly to the newspaper for publication. But, I think that most > obituaries are submitted through the Funeral Home. I believe that newspapers > generally don't write obituaries these days. Rather, I think that they merely > report death information submitted by others. So, the Funeral Home would > probably know better than the newspaper who actually prepared any given > obituary. > > Steve Coker > http://scroots.org/ -- L. L. Scott, IBSSG L. L. Scott's Virtual Office: http://www.geocities.com/~llscott/ BEAR/ BRANNAN/ BRICKER/ BRIDGE/ BACKUS/ BRAUN/ DOTY/ HARPER/ HATCH/ PLANK

[email protected] wrote: > I believe obits, like everything else that has been written, are copyrighted. > They were written by someone--either a member of the family, or most often, > the newspaper.... I've written two newspaper obituaries for close relatives. My understanding, based on experience, about the way obituaries are done these days is something like this. The Funeral Home requests information from the family or other survivors regarding the deceased. The Funeral Home then, with that information, writes an obituary using a standard format used by that Funeral Home. The Funeral Home asks the family to approve the obituary. The Funeral Home then submits the obituary to the newspaper for publication. However, I believe that the family or anyone else could prepare the obituary and submit it directly to the newspaper for publication. But, I think that most obituaries are submitted through the Funeral Home. I believe that newspapers generally don't write obituaries these days. Rather, I think that they merely report death information submitted by others. So, the Funeral Home would probably know better than the newspaper who actually prepared any given obituary. Steve Coker http://scroots.org/

I believe obits, like everything else that has been written, are copyrighted. They were written by someone--either a member of the family, or most often, the newspaper. I doubt seriously that anyone is going to take you to court over something this insignificant, but if you didn't write it, you can bet it belongs to somebody else--whatever it is. Just my opinion Cat

Hi, I subscribed to this list because I'm totally baffled about whether I can post an obituary or not. I wanted to reproduce different obits I found in boxes in Mom's attic to the surname board or mail lists for those names. Some are older than 1923, so I guess I can? Others are before 1949 ???? Does copyright even pertain to obits? I don't know what papers many of these were cut from, and many don't give years either--- then what? Must I paraphrase them when I'd really rather give them "as is" ? Help! April Anne

New Genealogy Books Announcement List: http://members.theglobe.com/genbooks/default.html

In a message dated 6/14/99 4:25:15 PM Central Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: << Before anyone decides to publish such a database to a WWW > site in its entirety, they'd be well advised to check the copy- > right and get permission from the compiler. >> By all means, check with the compiler. I recently had an E-mail from someone who said they were going to put five of the cemeteries I worked so hard to survey on the net--using a book she had purchased. I requested she not do this. Our library is selling those books to make money to buy microfilm and books for others to use in their research. Besides. She didn't have to deal with packs of dogs, yellow jackets and nuts shooting at birds. I believe this woman was truly trying to be helpful, but just wasn't thinking it out. If I had wanted to put this information on the net, I would have done so myself. Remember, citing sources is not enough. Getting permission is necessary. I realize public records are not copyrightable, but there is something to just doing the right thing. Cat

Don't forget if you are copying someone else's material with out verifingy it, you may copy theier mistakes (or intentional errors). matt emerson wrote: > > "Very probably. However, if another individual uses facts or public domain > information from that book to write a paper on "MA Deaths of Family > Dougherty (and all Variations) with Named Parent's," it is a different > selection of the original facts." > > Mike, I agree with this - as long as the source is properly cited. > Confining the material used to one name or one family is not a > sufficient "taking" to damage the book's sale value and it could > be argued that the "Dougherty article" gave the book publicity > and enhanced its sale value. This is a far far different thing from > publishing an entire database or book to a > WWW site, which was the original topic of discussion. > > "However, a compilation of ALL of the names of people with their headstone > inscriptions buried in the "Cedar Bluffs Cemetery" probably would not be > sufficiently original, especially of the entries are ordered in > alphabetical or chronilogical order." > > Before anyone decides to publish such a database to a WWW > site in its entirety, they'd be well advised to check the copy- > right and get permission from the compiler. We're all > amateurs and this is a complex legal issue. A rule of thumb > I recall from my school days is if a fact or bit of information is > commonly available (5 or more places) it can be considered > "public domain", and that may have played a part in the Feist > decision. Depending on who owns Cedar Bluff Cemetery, and > hence the cemetery records, those facts may not be public > domain. The sort of info that goes into a phone directory is > currently and commonly available in a number of different > places. I see a world of difference between a phone directory > and most genealogical compilations. > > To quote Dr. B: "The issue is doing The Right Thing. > The right thing generally involves working with authors, gensocs, > and publishers and trying to avoid damaging the economic value of > what they do." > > Hope we haven't bored the list to death - have a good Sunday, > all! > > Kathleen. -- L. L. Scott, IBSSG L. L. Scott's Virtual Office: http://www.geocities.com/~llscott/ BEAR/ BRANNAN/ BRICKER/ BRIDGE/ BACKUS/ BRAUN/ DOTY/ HARPER/ HATCH/ PLANK

Hi Scott: You've got it right. Anything published before 1923 has passed into the public domain. Laws in effect at the time allowed for 28 year copyright + 28 year renewal. It was not until recent laws, 1978 and later that a number of years after the author's death was added to the copyright period. Larry Kinyon ----- Original Message ----- From: Scott K. Williams <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, June 13, 1999 1:51 AM Subject: Law Clarification > Dear List, > > It was my understanding that any book published before 1923 > was now public domain. However, when I asked an archivist at > the Missouri Historical Society, he insisted that it is much more > complicated than that. He said that it depends on when the author > died. I think he said 25 years must pass since the author's death. > > Can someone clarify this for me ? > > --Scott Williams > >

At 09:54 AM 6/12/99 -0600, matt emerson wrote: >If M. O'Brien sorts through MA death records and comes up >with "MA Deaths of Irish Natives with Named Parents" isn't >that a creatively original selection of facts? If McWethey >comes up with a Palatine compilation from English records, >again, isn't that a creatively original selection of facts? Very probably. However, if another individual uses facts or public domain information from that book to write a paper on "MA Deaths of Family Dougherty (and all Variations) with Named Parent's," it is a different selection of the original facts. However, a compilation of ALL of the names of people with their headstone inscriptions buried in the "Cedar Bluffs Cemetery" probably would not be sufficiently original, especially of the entries are ordered in alphabetical or chronilogical order. Mike ________________ The Goad Family; Dover, AR, USA; mailto:[email protected] ; http://www.cswnet.com/~mgoad/ ; free DAR Patriot Index Lookups: http://www.cswnet.com/~mgoad/dar.html; Our on-line "bookstore:" http://www.cswnet.com/~sbooks Sponsor (Plus) of RootsWeb - To support cooperative, non-commercial, grass-roots genealogy go to http://www.rootsweb.com/rootsweb/how-to-subscribe.html

Dear List, It was my understanding that any book published before 1923 was now public domain. However, when I asked an archivist at the Missouri Historical Society, he insisted that it is much more complicated than that. He said that it depends on when the author died. I think he said 25 years must pass since the author's death. Can someone clarify this for me ? --Scott Williams

Hi Everyone. thank You for all the help. I think I need to explain more: The first page of this Book is stated as: xxxx County Birth Recorded 1850-1877 Courtesy of John J. XXX , County Clerk Format Used: Name of Child Birthdate Father-Age-Pl.of Birth Mother-Age-Pl. of Birth # of Child Born Filing Date Copied by: xxxx Sept. 1974 Okay, there is only one of these books. It's never been sold, It's at the Public Library in the genealogy Section- This is not owned or copyrighted to Gen. Soc. What is abv, is what creative info. there is in the whole book. When I goto the Co. Clerks office, I get an Index book, when I find the name, I pay the $7.00 fee to get the other abv info. It's about making Money not Copyright. The orginal book is just fine. they keep great records. I can go to the county next door, They give me the index for birth or death and when I find the name they go get the orginal book and let me copy the info for free. They will let me copy it all. My delma lays in weather or not this mans info is copyrighted. The info and the way it is wrote, is the same as it is in the orginal. So, The County Clerk wants the money. Now, here is another quiestion reguarding Copyright And Marriage Lic. Same County. back in the 70's a person went in a made a photocopy of every single page in the Marriage Book. It states that. Which again the County Clerk wants the money so I can't get or noone for that matter can get to that info. w/o paying the money. So, this Marriage Lic. Book couldn't be copyrighted. I think my quiestion replys to the Law Of Monoply on Public Domain records and Copyright effects to the only to books which neither have been copyrighted. I hope this makes since and is much clearer. Candi