HOME PAGE

see below:
Below is is a portion of U.S. copyright law You will find that I comply.
all works on my site contains a footnote explaining ownership.
I do not sell, rent or otherwise receive monetary gratification of those works.
fair use It is not an infringement of copyright to make short quotations from a work for purposes of criticism, comment, teaching, scholarship, or research. 17 USC �107. However, every quotation must be clearly identified with the name of the author and the source of the quotation. The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, Article 10(3), which is implemented in national laws of many countries. Suitable forms for identification of author and source are contained in academic style manuals (e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style), in the rules for footnotes or bibliographic citations. The fair use statute, 17 USC �107, says: Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include � the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; the nature of the copyrighted work; the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors. The meaning of the words in 17 USC �107, and the relative weight of each of the four factors, have been interpreted in a long series of court cases, of which the following are particularly important: Sony v. Universal, 464 U.S. 417 (1984); Harper & Row v. Nation, 471 U.S. 539 (1985); Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, 510 U.S. 569 (1994); AGU v. Texaco, 60 F.3d 913 (1995), cert. dismissed, 116 S.Ct. 592 (1995). There is little guidance that gives a precise, quantitative determination of the line that divides fair use from infringement. The nearest thing to such guidance is an agreement of publishers and academics that was cited in the U.S. House of Representatives Report 94-1476 that accompanied the major revision of U.S. Copyright Law in 1976. This agreement is persuasive authority, but not legally binding on a court in the U.S.A. See AGU v. Texaco, 60 F.3d 913, 917-919, n.5 (1995). I posted a copy of the agreement on the Internet as an independent document, to clearly separate the agreement from my own writing. Note that this agreement does not apply to commercial use, but only applies to copying of books and periodicals in nonprofit educational institutions. Also note that this agreement does not purport to state the boundary between fair use and infringement, but only suggests that uses less than the stated threshold should be fair use. Photocopy Machines Photocopy machines have been commonly used in libraries and offices since the mid-1960's. Yet the business and legal community was startled in 1991-1996 by a series of federal cases that held that some common uses of a photocopy machine were copyright infringement: Basic Books v. Kinko's, 758 F.Supp. 1522 (1991). AGU v. Texaco, 60 F.3d 913 (1995), cert. dismissed, 116 S.Ct. 592 (1995). Princeton Univ. Press v. Mich. Document Service, 99 F.3d 1381 (1996), cert. den. 117 S.Ct. 1336 (1997). That these cases appeared more than thirty years after the introduction of the photocopy machine shows how slow law is to respond to new technology. The Princeton Univ. Press v. Mich. Document Service case is particularly important for professors. In that case, professors copied chapters of books and articles in scholarly journals, then handed the set of photocopies to Michigan Document Service to reproduce into a custom-made textbook for students. Of course, no royalties were paid to the owners of the copyrighted material that was photocopied and distributed. The courts held that this copying was an infringement of copyright. Aside from legal issues of copyright infringement, a professor should set a good example for his/her students, by respecting copyrights of other authors. Copying on the Internet Most of copyright law was formulated in terms of books, audiovisual works (e.g., motion pictures), and sound recordings. While the basic principles of copyright law are the same for all media, it is not yet clear how some of these principles apply to the Internet. The act of viewing a page on the Internet automatically involves making a copy, since the material is transferred to the user's computer and stored there in semiconductor memory (RAM = random access memory). This copy is arguably not infringement, because authors post documents on the Internet with the intent of having other people read the documents, so there may be an implied license to copy web pages during the reading of them. Moreover, the copy in RAM evaporates when the machine is switched off and the copy in RAM is overwritten when the next document is read, so the copy in RAM is not permanent. Some browsers, such as Netscape, make a second copy of a document on the hard disk drive (e.g., for Netscape running under Windows 3.1, typically as a file in C:\NETSCAPE\CACHE\*.*). The purpose of this second copy is to make access quicker when the user presses the Back button on the browser. Retrieving a copy from the hard disk on the user's machine is much faster than reading the document again from the source machine and again transmitting the document through the Internet. While this second copy is a convenient feature of a browser, the designer and programmer probably gave no thought to the implications of this copy under copyright law. The cache directory on the user's hard disk is set by default in Netscape 3 to five megabytes of the most recently accessed documents. Once this limit is reached, the browser automatically deletes the oldest document to make room for the current document. The copies in cache on the hard disk will survive switching off the user's machine, but the copies will not survive repeated accessing of more documents from the Internet. The copy in cache is arguably acceptable practice under copyright law, provided that this copy is not used for any other purpose. A third way to make a copy with a browser is to use the Print command to make a paper copy of the document. Such copying may be infringement of a copyright or there may be an implied license from the author for such paper copies. If a court finds that there is an implied license, a court could still find infringement, if the licensee's use exceeded the scope of the implied license. A fourth way to make a copy with a browser is to use the Save As command from the File menu. This command saves the HTML, JPEG, or other file on the user's hard disk with a filename chosen by the user. Such copying may be infringement of a copyright. Servers operated by local Internet Service Providers obviously transmit a copy of documents requested by their users. A new section of the copyright law, 17 USC � 512(a) (1998), provides immunity from infringement to Internet service providers who automatically transmit or route copies of material in response to requests from users. Another new copyright law provides immunity from infringement to Internet service providers who maintain a temporary copy (called caching) of a frequently requested document on their server, to reduce the amount of long-distance communications and to decrease response time. 17 USC � 512(b) (1998). Internet service providers (ISPs) and colleges should be aware of amendments to the copyright statutes in 1998 that provide the corporation or college with immunity from infringement by their customers or students if the ISP or college complies with certain requirements prior to the infringement. Consult a local attorney who is familiar with copyright law for details. A user who copies text or pictures from one web site and then posts the material among the user's own web pages is generally infringing a copyright. Even if the user makes some changes before posting the material, the act of posting can be copyright infringement, as explained above in the section on plagiarism. Aside from legal implications of copyright infringement, reposting of material from other web sites can be an inconvenience to other users. The author may revise the original document frequently, but copies posted by other users will not be revised (indeed, the author may not know of the existence of these copies). The easiest way for everyone on the Internet to have the freshest information is to have only the author post the document. Other people can post a hypertext link to the author's document, to refer their readers to the most recent version of the document at the author's site. Copying illustrations or diagrams or photographs (e.g., scanning a printed image or copying a GIF or JPEG file) always requires permission of the copyright owner, unless the works are clearly in the public domain (e.g., either a work produced by the U.S. Government or a work that was initially published before 1922 and was registered with the U.S. Copyright Office). Posting a document on the world wide web is not publication. Publication is defined in the U.S. Copyright statute as ... the distribution of copies ... of a work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending. .... A public performance or display of a work does not of itself constitute publication.

MY PRIVACY POLICY

I do not provide cookies or otherwise atempt to track or identify visitors.
I do not send unsolicited e-mails nor do I not provide adress
information or the content of any e-mails I receive without the express consent of the author.
You will not find any pop up, popunder or end pop ads or dialups or dial arounds on this site.
I do not use spyware or adware nor do I condone its use.

BEFORE ENTERING
you may want to reset your text size to medium or smaller
and turn off your popup blocker
(there are no popups on this site) but many pages open in a new window.