Re: Good Samaritan and copyright

<< Previous Message | Next Message >>
From:"M. Brown" <>
To:Jeff Silverman <>
Date:Wed, 10 Mar 1999 09:56:28 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type:TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

I agree,in fact after what Shandon has written in their replies, I would
think twice now about buying any of their products, especially if they
give you a replacement book.Marianne

On Tue, 9 Mar 1999, Jeff Silverman wrote:

> Hey gang. Don't sweat the small stuff. When I write for reprints, I get
> photocopies of papers from authors who didn't order reprints every month.
> You are allowed, even encouraged to photocopy stuff for your research as
> long as you're not going to reproduce and disseminate it for financial
> gain. I do think that a vendor would want to do everything possible to keep
> a user informed about their instrument. Maybe an online version would
> eliminate some of the exorbitant printing costs.
> Jeff Silverman----------
> From: KathY Liucci <>
> To:;
> Subject: Re: Good Samaritan
> Date: Tuesday, March 09, 1999 5:22 PM
> Mark wrote:
>  My main intent was to remind us all that  there are copyright laws action
> over this one particular situation.  Like Mr. Berger said, "what is to stop
> people from photocopying and distributing Histology text books, manuals,
> and scientific papers, which are also protected under the same copyright
> laws?"
> This is an interesting point.   Does this, copyright law, apply to books
> that are at the library?  For instance, what about reference books and
> other controlled literature that you are not able to check out?  Can you
> then make a photocopy of the articles or information and be within the law?
>   People make copies of procedures from books and manuals everyday.  Is
> there a fine line here?  How is this different from a instrument procedure
> manual?  I think we all need to have a law degree also:)
> Thanks
> Kathy Liucci
> Mesa, AZ
> ----------

<< Previous Message | Next Message >>