Upon reading a few articles on copyright and web materials I've become confused. On the one hand, specific sections of US copyright law indicates that *any* expression that has *any* permanent form (including web pages, E-mails, etc.) should be considered copyrighted/copyrightable. On the other hand, isn't the purpose of copyright to protect *valuable* property--that is, property whose unauthorized use will deprive its creator of some income? *If* this is part of copyright, then does/should copyright extend to stuff that has no commercial purpose/intent--something that describes most E-mails and personal web pages? I suspect there is no answer to this till it gets tested in court, but I'd be interested in any expert opinions. --Christian Nelson Barry Wellman wrote:

I personally consider public websites to be like other published material. I cite, reference and quote all the time, without hiding everything. (Indeed, if you give the URL [as you should] in the references, what's there to hide?)

Of course, like other published material, fair use copyright considerations come into play.

Barry ___________________________________________________________________

Barry Wellman Professor of Sociology NetLab Director wellman@chass.utoronto.ca http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Centre for Urban & Community Studies University of Toronto 455 Spadina Avenue Toronto Canada M5S 2G8 fax:+1-416-978-7162 ___________________________________________________________________ To Live is To Network To Network is To Live

_______________________________________________ Air-l mailing list Air-l@aoir.org http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l