Can I sell access to viewing a compiled list of business emails?

[Zigner]

One has to wonder if the copyright for these emails actually belong to the employers of the senders...

 

[quincy]

I stand by my statement. The SENDER is irrelevant. Copyright stems from when the person WROTE the body of the message.

Eh? My mail system keeps a copy of every message I send. That's certainly going to be as good of evidence as anything else online. Further, if Mr. I publishes it with the proper attribution rather than just stealing the body text, it should be fairly clear that the content is my protected work.

The list of addresses might be a trade secret, but I can bet if Mr. I has them, than no attempt to treat such as secret has occurred.

Huh?

Who said anything about "evidence?" It is generally pretty easy to detect who sent what to whom.

The unauthorized publication of most emails is not going to lead to copyright infringement claims. Could an infringement suit be fashioned? Sure.

 

[indrosum]

It's only the content of the email (subject line and body) that would be compiled in this library, not the email address or email address list. There would be an attribution to the original sender as well.

 

[Zigner]

It's only the content of the email (subject line and body) that would be compiled in this library, not the email address or email address list. There would be an attribution to the original sender as well.

If these are emails sent during the course of business, then the copyright to work product (those emails) likely lies with the business, thus you would need their permission to publish them.

 

[quincy]

It's only the content of the email (subject line and body) that would be compiled in this library, not the email address or email address list. There would be an attribution to the original sender as well.

Others apparently are seeing lawsuits I am not seeing.

You can have what you intend to do reviewed personally by an IP or publishing law attorney in your area - or you can, as Zigner suggested, acquire permission from the senders to publish the emails they sent you.

It will be the specifics that matter here.

 

[FlyingRon]

Attribution doesn't fix infringement.

 

[quincy]

Attribution doesn't fix infringement.

It potentially can mitigate damages.

I am still not seeing what you are seeing here.

 

[cbg]

What I am having trouble understanding is why the OP thinks anyone would be interested in this library of emails he's received.

 

[quincy]

What I am having trouble understanding is why the OP thinks anyone would be interested in this library of emails he's received.

Hahaha. That is a bit of a puzzle, isn't it?

I am not seeing that anyone would want to pay me for the emails I receive.

And I am also not seeing that any of the commercial businesses who send me material would be overly upset if I passed on or published their messages to others.

 

[FlyingRon]

Qunicy seems to feel that email communication contains only trite blurbs similar to this forum. In fact, there is often substantial commercial activity passed in emails. I receive emails from companies that are far more than "Hi Ron ...yada yada yada." These are email publications that took a substantial amount of effort to produce and are directed only to me and other customers. The company rightfully so can get upset over their secondary dissemination, especially when it's to allow someone else to make a buck at the possibility of taking customers away from their services.

 

[Zigner]

Due to the nature of the business that I work for, most communications with customers are considered "confidential" and not to be disseminated outside our business structure, except as needed. (Military/Aerospace)

 

[quincy]

The emails come from just signing up for newsletters, free downloads, etc. Then they send out daily or weekly emails. They would be emails coming to my inbox that I would then post for reference for others who are paying me a subscription.

Quincy seems to feel that email communication contains only trite blurbs similar to this forum. In fact, there is often substantial commercial activity passed in emails. I receive emails from companies that are far more than "Hi Ron ...yada yada yada." These are email publications that took a substantial amount of effort to produce and are directed only to me and other customers. The company rightfully so can get upset over their secondary dissemination, especially when it's to allow someone else to make a buck at the possibility of taking customers away from their services.

Quincy is reading what has been posted and is not seeing what you are seeing. That is correct. But you are incorrect about my understanding of emails and what they can contain. Please reread my posts.

I have mentioned several areas of legal concern. I see copyright infringement as the area least likely to spawn a lawsuit.

But, because I do not know what sort of emails indrosum intends to compile or for what purpose (other than creating a "library" for others to pay to access) he intends to create this library, I am continuing to advise indrosum to have his plans personally reviewed by an IP attorney or publishing law professional.

 

[Taxing Matters]

The issue of privacy or defamation might be more likely legal avenues explored over shared content.

I would suggest that at the very least the OP consider scrubbing the e-mails of all names, trademarks, and any other identifying information and replace them with generic placeholders. If the idea is simply to create a database of what works and what doesn't, doing that should not undermine the objective of the database but would likely go a long way towards reducing friction and threats of legal action with the people/entities who created and sent the e-mails.

 

[quincy]

I would suggest that at the very least the OP consider scrubbing the e-mails of all names, trademarks, and any other identifying information and replace them with generic placeholders. If the idea is simply to create a database of what works and what doesn't, doing that should not undermine the objective of the database but would likely go a long way towards reducing friction and threats of legal action with the people/entities who created and sent the e-mails.

I am not sure eliminating identifiers is the smartest move. Passing off material as his own comes with its own set of problems.

But it really depends on the specifics and these specifics need to be personally reviewed.

Again, I am not seeing the publication of emails as much a copyright infringement concern (although it potentially could be that) as a possible problem in other areas.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

The emails come from just signing up for newsletters, free downloads, etc. Then they send out daily or weekly emails. They would be emails coming to my inbox that I would then post for reference for others who are paying me a subscription.

I missed this post the first time around. I get about a hundred such emails a week and I've never seen one that wasn't protected by copyright and the subscription "reprinting" of them would be a violation of the copyright holders rights.