TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Re[4]: How one fellow sees us From:Romay Jean Sitze <rositze -at- NMSU -dot- EDU> Date:Tue, 11 Oct 1994 21:33:54 -0600
This idea is ancient and as far as I know, Virginia Krenn is right.
> I don't agree with your criticism of Richard's post. I think that when
> wnash -at- sunquest -dot- com wrote a diatribe against the Techwriter's list that he
> gave up any rights that he may have had to not have his message
reproduced
> to the very same list that he railed against.
> It seems that there is a point of law that says everyone has a right to
> "face their accuser" or in this case to at least know what they're being
> accused of.
> Virginia
> ______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
> Author: Karen Kay <karenk -at- netcom -dot- com> at SMTP
> Richard Mateosian said:
> > >I would caution against the reposting of someone's
> > >message without their prior permission.
> >
> > I find this a little strange, given that a large percentage of the messages
> > on this and most other lists contain, in toto, the message they are
> > responding to. Exactly what consequences should I be cautious of? ...RM
> A lot of people consider reposting a message to another list without
> the author's permission a rude thing to do. I certainly would not be
> at all happy if someone reposted something I wrote here to another
> list without asking me for permission to do so. (Or if someone used
> something I wrote in an article without my permission--we've already
> been around once about *that* topic.)
> Also, it could be construed as a violation of copyright.
> I'm not at all sure about quoting the entire message in a response. On
> the other hand, if that's part of an ongoing conversation, I suppose
> it could be construed as fair use. This strikes me as very different
> in intent (though also poor manners, of course) because it's in the
> same forum.
> Karen
> karenk -at- netcom -dot- com
****************************************
* RoMay Sitze rositze -at- nmsu -dot- edu *
****************************************
* Mirrors should reflect a *
* little before throwing *
* back images. *
* -Jean Cocteau- *
****************************************
