[Prev][Next][Thread Index][Subject Index]

Re: Read only if you love TREK






Joyce Harmon <jlharmon@mail.crosslink.net> wrote...
> In the trek newsgroups, I have noted a tendency of Trek fans to believe
that 
> due to their long devotion, they actually *own* Trek, rather than the
actual 
> copyright owners.  The law says otherwise.  A similar situation arose a
few 
> years ago when the Margaret Mitchell estate contracted with a romance
writer 
> to write a sequel to Gone With The Wind.  I thought it was a dumb move 
> (though of course it made them a bundle, so perhaps not so dumb), but
many 
> GWTW fans were incensed and tried to say that the Mitchell estate didn't 
> have the RIGHT to do that.  On the contrary.  As holders of the
copyright, 
> they had every right to do it.

Technically you may be right, but I feel the need to point out that 'having
the right to etc.' is not by definition decided by what the law does and
does not say. The net total of considerations a judge weighs in his or her
decision is also made up of jurisprudence and 'the general consensus on
justice' in a society on any given moment. Sometimes the latter two can
overrule what the lawbook says. Now I realize that such a case would be
hard to present where copyrights are involved, but surely not impossible. 

In Mitchell's case it might very well have been ruled that the combined
interest of all her fans outweighs the right of some heirs to make a quick
buck out of a famous title (rather tastelessly done too should you ask me).
To return to Trek I'm not sure that I see where Paramount would be losing
money; the owners of the closed sites sure weren't charging anything for it
and it's doubtful how many of those who surfed into them would have cared
to become part of MSN. 

> 
> Now.  Having said that, I still think Paramount is being ridiculous for 
> trying to shut down sites that are simple appreciation and fan activity. 

> But are they within their legal rights?  The answer to that probably
varies 
> from site to site.

'Legal' in the sense of 'lawful': maybe. But in the sense of 'rightful'? I
doubt it, frankly.

> 
> Joyce
> 

Francis
-----------




Follow-Ups: References: