In article > (Sun, 21 Nov
2004 01:06:58 +0000), Alex Chaihorsky wrote:

> Sorry, re-read copyright laws. Unless accompanied by a copyright statement,
> nothing is copyrighted.

Signatories to the Berne Convention, including the U.S., have agreed that
the material is copyrighted when it is first affixed in tangible form --
unless the original author explicitly relinquishes his or her rights.

> Because copyright forbids duplication of the whole and any part of the
> material.

Copyright law does not and has never forbid duplication of "any part" of
the material. (Congress members under the control of the RIAA and MPAA
are in the process of changing this.)

Why do you ask others to "re-read copyright laws" without having done so
yourself?

> So by including your message above mine like I did I am breaking
> copyright laws (if, according to you every individual message's copyright
> belong to an author?

By releasing the article on Usenet, the author implicitly grants
license for the quotation, duplication, reproduction, retransmission, and
storage of copies of the article. That's the way Usenet works.