[MilCom] Re: Policy Question Public Posting of Logs withCopyright Restriction

[Paul]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Jones" <wejones at megalink.net>
To: <milcom at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 8:37 AM
Subject: Re: [MilCom] Re: Policy Question Public Posting of Logs
withCopyright Restriction


>
>
> > I can't speak for others to the practice of this procedure so I am
strictly
> > speaking for myself.  I started adding the copyright notice about a year
ago.
> > It was brought to my attention that some frequency and talkgroup
information
> > which I originally posted happened to find its way in print in a
commercial
> > publication.  This in itself didn't bother me, what bothered me was the
fact the
> > publication labeled the source as "anonymous".
>
> Is it possible that they were actually doing you a favor by labeling it as
> anonymous?  Although I used to know it almost by heart, I have long since
given
> up trying to keep up with all the amendments to the Comm. Act of 1934 over
the
> last 2 decades.  It is now way to complicated for me to hope to
understand.
> However it used to be that while it was perfectly legal for anyone to
listen to
> most communications, that it was not legal to tell others about the
content
> and/or the frequencies of most communications.  I know that this rule has
been
> almost uniformly ignored both before and after the recent amendments, but
it
> was something that always hung overhead in that it could be enforced if
they
> wanted to come after you for some other reason.  But "if" that segment of
the
> regulation is by chance still in effect, perhaps by labeling the report as
> anonymous, both the publication and the individual is off the hook?
>    Is anyone familiar enough with the NEW communications act to comment on
> whether the prohibition on divulging the content/freq of certain
communications
> monitored is still in effect?  Just curious.
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Bill Jones   Sweden, Maine wejones at megalink dot net
> http://www.megalink.net/~wejones
> http://www.megalink.net/~wejones/wwii.html
> -- 
>
>
I am familiar with one of the commercial lists George is referring to. Where
I have a problem with what took place, both the magazine, and the columnist
made money from George's personal work. George may be OK with that, and if
he is, then I guess I will be too. But, if they want the information to make
money from, they should spend time monitoring, or pay for his time (if that
is what he wants). If it is recognition, and usually that is all that is
asked by monitors / contributors, then at least use the ink to do that. Most
of us do this as a hobby, for fun etc. If I post something, I have no
problem with anyone using it. If you are going to get monetary gain, at
least ask me if it is OK. If this is done, I'll give it to you.
Unfortunatley, I am busier than I would like, being one of those who is
listened to, and don't get enough time to monitor, and post. Maybe one of
these days, I will retire (full time!), and have more to give to the group.
73,
Paul    N5XMV