T
thatguy72001
Guest
What is the name of your state? Louisiana
I am interested in knowing whether or not it is legal to use, for commercial purposes (i.e., a book), another's personal emails (having no original commercial value), including and primarily but not limited to, love letters sent to me from a number of correspondents. After their names, email addresses and other specific identifiers were altered and/or stripped away, the email texts would be used in their entirety.
My question has nothing to do with "false light", "defamation", "libel", "privacy" or any permutation of that premise. (Your volunteered thoughts would be welcomed however.) Rather, I am exclusively concerned with my ability to use their own emailed words to me (and my replies to them). It would pertain more to "fair use" and "copyright infringement”.Here's some info I found on the net, via http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html , pertaining to it. Your general opinion would be truly appreciated.
There's a pretty simple rule when it comes to the net. If you didn't write it, and you want to reproduce it, ask the creator.
The "fair use" exemption to (U.S.) copyright law was created to allow things such as commentary, parody, news reporting, research and education about copyrighted works without the permission of the author. That's important so that copyright law doesn't block your freedom to express your own works -- only the ability to express other people's. Intent, and damage to the commercial value of the work are important considerations. Are you reproducing an article from the New York Times because you needed to in order to criticise the quality of the New York Times, or because you couldn't find time to write your own story, or didn't want your readers to have to register at the New York Times web site? The first is probably fair use, the others probably aren't.
To have a copy is not to have the copyright. All the E-mail you write is copyrighted. However, E-mail is not, unless previously agreed, secret. So you can certainly report on what E-mail you are sent, and reveal what it says. You can even quote parts of it to demonstrate. Frankly, somebody who sues over an ordinary message would almost surely get no damages, because the message has no commercial value, but if you want to stay strictly in the law, you should ask first. On the other hand, don't go nuts if somebody posts E-mail you sent them. If it was an ordinary non-secret personal letter of minimal commercial value with no copyright notice (like 99.9% of all E-mail), you probably won't get any damages if you sue them. Note as well that, the law aside, keeping private correspondence private is a courtesy one should usually honour.
While copyright law makes it technically illegal to reproduce almost any new creative work (other than under fair use) without permission, if the work is unregistered and has no real commercial value, it gets very little protection. The author in this case can sue for an injunction against the publication, actual damages from a violation, and possibly court costs. Actual damages means actual money potentially lost by the author due to publication, plus any money gained by the defendant. But if a work has no commercial value, such as a typical E-mail message or conversational USENET posting, the actual damages will be zero. Only the most vindictive (and rich) author would sue when no damages are possible, and the courts don't look kindly on vindictive plaintiffs, unless the defendants are even more vindictive.
Posting E-mail is technically a violation, but revealing facts from E-mail you got isn't, and for almost all typical E-mail, nobody could wring any damages from you for posting it. The law doesn't do much to protect works with no commercial value.
Thank You,
Don Baker
I am interested in knowing whether or not it is legal to use, for commercial purposes (i.e., a book), another's personal emails (having no original commercial value), including and primarily but not limited to, love letters sent to me from a number of correspondents. After their names, email addresses and other specific identifiers were altered and/or stripped away, the email texts would be used in their entirety.
My question has nothing to do with "false light", "defamation", "libel", "privacy" or any permutation of that premise. (Your volunteered thoughts would be welcomed however.) Rather, I am exclusively concerned with my ability to use their own emailed words to me (and my replies to them). It would pertain more to "fair use" and "copyright infringement”.Here's some info I found on the net, via http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html , pertaining to it. Your general opinion would be truly appreciated.
There's a pretty simple rule when it comes to the net. If you didn't write it, and you want to reproduce it, ask the creator.
The "fair use" exemption to (U.S.) copyright law was created to allow things such as commentary, parody, news reporting, research and education about copyrighted works without the permission of the author. That's important so that copyright law doesn't block your freedom to express your own works -- only the ability to express other people's. Intent, and damage to the commercial value of the work are important considerations. Are you reproducing an article from the New York Times because you needed to in order to criticise the quality of the New York Times, or because you couldn't find time to write your own story, or didn't want your readers to have to register at the New York Times web site? The first is probably fair use, the others probably aren't.
To have a copy is not to have the copyright. All the E-mail you write is copyrighted. However, E-mail is not, unless previously agreed, secret. So you can certainly report on what E-mail you are sent, and reveal what it says. You can even quote parts of it to demonstrate. Frankly, somebody who sues over an ordinary message would almost surely get no damages, because the message has no commercial value, but if you want to stay strictly in the law, you should ask first. On the other hand, don't go nuts if somebody posts E-mail you sent them. If it was an ordinary non-secret personal letter of minimal commercial value with no copyright notice (like 99.9% of all E-mail), you probably won't get any damages if you sue them. Note as well that, the law aside, keeping private correspondence private is a courtesy one should usually honour.
While copyright law makes it technically illegal to reproduce almost any new creative work (other than under fair use) without permission, if the work is unregistered and has no real commercial value, it gets very little protection. The author in this case can sue for an injunction against the publication, actual damages from a violation, and possibly court costs. Actual damages means actual money potentially lost by the author due to publication, plus any money gained by the defendant. But if a work has no commercial value, such as a typical E-mail message or conversational USENET posting, the actual damages will be zero. Only the most vindictive (and rich) author would sue when no damages are possible, and the courts don't look kindly on vindictive plaintiffs, unless the defendants are even more vindictive.
Posting E-mail is technically a violation, but revealing facts from E-mail you got isn't, and for almost all typical E-mail, nobody could wring any damages from you for posting it. The law doesn't do much to protect works with no commercial value.
Thank You,
Don Baker
