NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #23/NN_1992_23.iso/spool/misc/consumer/17516

Internet Message Format | 1992-10-07 | 1.6 KB

Xref: sparky misc.consumers:17516 alt.politics.elections:15434
Path: sparky!uunet!gumby!wupost!sdg.dra.com!sean
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: misc.consumers,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Cable Bill Rip-off
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 7 Oct 92 11:03:29 CDT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: Data Research Associates, St. Louis MO
Lines: 23

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Marc J Byrd) writes:
> Your analogy is fundamentally flawed.  Let's make it more valid:
>
> Say Time/Warner took TIME Magazine, made a few million copies, and mailed
> them out FREE to anyone who had the equipment (analog of a TV set)
> to receive them.  (Broadcasters don't (yet) make me pay to receive
> their signal).

I receive many "free" magazines and newspapers every week.  Things like
InfoWorld, Communications Week, and a few dozen more are sent to me
at no charge.  Every single one of them is copyrighted, and the publishers
get a bit upset when people reprint their articles without permission.  Oh
by the way, Time-Warner also gives away  a few hundred copies of TIME every
week for a variety of things.  It doesn't make their copyright any less
enforcable.

I listen to several radio stations at no charge, but if I want to have
music-on-hold on my phone system by piping a radio in to the phone system
ASCAP, BMI, etc demand a fee of $100 per line.  They also prosecute
people who don't pay.
--
Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO
Domain: [e-mail], Voice: (Work) [phone]