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