On 16 Nov 2003, Steven Hay posted the following to
rec.food.drink.tea:

> Derek wrote:
>> On 16 Nov 2003, Space Cowboy posted the following to
>>
>>>All of my posts have an implicit copyright which I stated in
>>>this newsgroup soon after it was formed. Any of my ideas which
>>
>> Actually, anything posted to this group is copyright of the
>> original poster - providing said poster either created the post
>> or had the right to post it.
>> <SNIP>
>> In fact, one has to explicity state that something IS public
>> domain for it to be so.
>
> So what does this mean for his book? It certainly seems that if
> someone post something in a public forum, they are expecting
> others to see it freely. As long as a person cites their
> sources, is there a problem?

Usenet posts are copyright the original poster (unless that post is
actually an infringement). And if someone is directly quoted or
even obviously paraphrased without credit, there are copyright
issues. In other words, get permission and cite your sources.

That said, just because person X posted that "PDQ is a good idea
for cleaning teapots" doesn't mean that person Y is violating
copyright for including that information in a book. It could be
common knowledge and may well exist elsewhere.

The other thing to keep in mind is that copyright infringement is a
civil issue primarily. It only becomes a felony if you make more
than 10 copies or the damages are greater than $2,500. All an
individual can do in most situations is sue for damages and obtain
an injunction against the supposed infringer.

However - you'd have one heck of a time proving damages from
content that is freely available to anyone with an internet
connection and a web browser.

--
Derek

No matter how great and destructive your problems may seem now,
remember, you've probably only seen the tip of them.