Re: copyright -- way past vs right now
Robert Johnson (johnsorl@COLORADO.EDU)
Tue, 7 Feb 1995 15:12:50 -0700
> authorship when they become fixed in a tangible form or
> expression. Note the protection does not extend to the content-
> only to its specific form. For example, a person could write
> something and have a copyright on what was written. It's legal
> for someone else to express the same ideas but in a different
> manner such as a different style of writing.
> The analogies do differ from the previous discussion. However,
> the point is there are no eternal monopolies on anything.
Lets get this straight. Because indigenous peoples for the most part
don't have written ie Western forms of cultural expression they're
not going to get copyright protection? You guys are going to have to
start reading within the discipline, educating yourselves as to legal
developments both international and U.S., and start getting over
your ethnocentric, patronizing, racially motivated nonsense.
> There does seem to be an eternal monopoly on stupidity in
certain sectors of anthropology!
FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF YOUR EDUCATION
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES: A SOURCE BOOK
EDITED BY TOM GREAVES
and tell Mike Lieber to get himself a copy too!