I rearranged the normal order of this message cause I should have forwarded it when I received it but didn't. I apologize for the awkwardness but I thought Betty had a valid question and I would appreciate hearing other views on the copyright issue. I did mention to her that I would ask Uncle Nash for permission to copy his work. Also, please see my request at the end of the forwarded messages that I asked concerning RICE. TIA, Lynn **************************************************************************** > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Betty M. Bivins" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2000 7:01 PM > Subject: raft swamp > > > > Lynn, > > Do you have the resources to scan those 25 pages and let us all have an electronic copy? or could you send me a photocopy and I will type it to put on the robeson list. it might take me 3-4 months, but that way we all could have a copy. or is the book copyrighted? would it be possiblefor you to type a few pages at the time and place on the list. > > Betty in GA > From: "Lynn Prettyman" <[email protected]> To: "Betty M. Bivins" <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2000 7:55 PM Subject: Re: raft swamp > > At the time Nash wrote the history, he gave acknowledgement to the record books of Raft Swamp Baptist Church, to the Associational Minutes, and a "brief, previous history" written by Jerry William TOWNSEND in 1954. >Nash was the Historian of the Robeson Association in 1961. I would think, therefore, that all of the material is copyrighted. (There is a warning that permission is needed to photocopy the church records and that was in 1982.) > Some of the material is described as newspaper clippings from 1965-69, of which clippings I do not have copies. I can always ask Nash for permission, but I don't know about the other sources. > > It would be safer, from a legal standpoint, I think, not to reproduce > electronic copies, but I am willing to be advised by anyone who may know the answer. Peggy, Sam or Joanne, your input, please. > > Lynn > **************************************************************************** *** I also have a question concerning the RICE family. My great-aunt, Etta LEE JOHNSON, dtr of Daniel JOHNSON and Emma Frances CARLISLE was married to Thurman LASSITER RICE. My father was friends with an A J RICE, (1942-43) and they may even have been at Ft Bragg together. Mom was born and lived in St Pauls and then lived in Lumberton after my father was sent overseas, so A J probably was from St Pauls and most likely a cousin. Do any of you recognize my aunt and her husband as being family members? Her sister, my grandmother, was Emma Winnifred JOHNSON, married to Bernice Mathuel ODOM. TIA, Lynn [email protected]

Mustn't a work be original before it can be copyrighted? If this is true, then what is copyrightable about a genealogy book---unless, of course, it has some unique features????? Geneally, they are composed of lineages based on public records. These are questions I've been pondering and would appreciate other views re the matter.

Hi, Margaret, I would agree with you except for the fact that my uncle's book is not a genealogy book. It is a true history of Raft Swamp Baptist Church. The only thing in it that would help us as genealogy buffs is the roll of members and the payroll. No families are delineated. My concern comes from the fact of his acknowledgement that he used "some information" from someone else's published work for part of his sources and since Peggy is married to a TOWNSEND, I thought it only prudent to get her opinion since it was Jerry TOWNSEND whom my uncle acknowledges. Lynn PRETTYMAN Baltimore, MD [email protected] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Margaret Miller" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 3:00 AM Subject: [NCROBESO-L] QUESTION re copyrights > Mustn't a work be original before it can be copyrighted? If this is > true, then what is copyrightable about a genealogy book---unless, of > course, it has some unique features????? Geneally, they are composed of > lineages based on public records. > > These are questions I've been pondering and would appreciate other views > re the matter. > >