Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site cae780.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!decwrl!greipa!pesnta!amd!amdcad!cae780!gordon
From: gordon@cae780.UUCP (Brian Gordon)
Newsgroups: net.women,net.nlang.india
Subject: Re: BLATANT DISRESPECT
Message-ID: <1031@cae780.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 22-Jun-85 02:56:56 EDT
Article-I.D.: cae780.1031
Posted: Sat Jun 22 02:56:56 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 26-Jun-85 06:20:35 EDT
References: <1801@ut-ngp.UUCP> <661@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP> <907@sdcsla.UUCP>
Reply-To: gordon@cae780.UUCP (Brian Gordon)
Organization: CAE Systems, Sunnyvale, CA
Lines: 18
Xref: watmath net.women:6075 net.nlang.india:467

In article <907@sdcsla.UUCP> west@sdcsla.UUCP (Larry West) writes:
>
>Beth, you're confused.   Legally, when someone sends you a letter,
>that letter belongs to you.   If they wish you to keep something
>confidential, they'd best say so -- but you are still under no
>legal compunction to obey their wishes.   And there may be very
>good reasons for not doing so.

I'm no lawyer either, but I am pretty sure that you own the piece of paper,
but that, unless explicitly released, the author still has common-law
copyright on the contents.  Every now and then, the estate of someone
famous threatens to go to court to get back -- or at least block 
publication of -- letters written to another individual.  They are always
successful.

FROM:   Brian G. Gordon, CAE Systems
UUCP:   {ihnp4, decvax!decwrl}!amd!cae780!gordon 
        {nsc, resonex, qubix, hplabs, leadsv, teklds}!cae780!gordon