Journal entries are in the Public Domain ?

"ADK’s newest release, No Place I’d Rather Be is a fascinating collection of entries from Adirondack lean-to journals. "

Perhaps this is common knowledge and I just never thought about it. I guess it makes sense, but the next time I consider commiting my deepest thoughts to a lean-to journal, I'll think twice. Seems like an easy way to make a living though...

HEY Are Forum Posts in the Public Domain ???

As I see it, you're not writing in a shelter/leanto journal for yourself, you are leaving your thoughts for others to enjoy. I have never considered these entries private and always have been given comfort that a long time down the road people will be able to have a glimpse of my experience in the same remote place. If one wants to write in a journal and have it kept private, bring one along and write in both.
VFTT is most certainly public. I was a long time anonymous viewer before I became a contributing member. It is the property of Darren though, and even if it was within the range of his personal principles to profit from the entries on this site (doubtful), as it seems to be with the ADK's, he seems to be a nice enough guy to ask first.

Pamola said:

As I see it, you're not writing in a shelter/leanto journal for yourself, you are leaving your thoughts for others to enjoy. ...

VFTT is most certainly public. I was a long time anonymous viewer before I became a contributing member. It is the property of Darren though, and even if it was within the range of his personal principles to profit from the entries on this site (doubtful), as it seems to be with the ADK's, he seems to be a nice enough guy to ask first.

Click to expand...

Nice, sly slap at the Adirondack Mountain Club. I don't think those leanto journals ever were put out there for the purpose of collecting kernels of wisdom and gems of thought for the ADK to collect and publish for profit.

Stuart Mesinger went through a bunch of Adirondack leanto journals (or log books) and produced the manuscript for a moderately interesting book titled "No Place I'd Rather Be." ADK agreed to publish the book. Mesinger is legitimately entitled to compensation for his efforts as compiler/editor, if he can get it. The publishing business entails takiung certain financial risks in return for the opportunity to gain a profit, and ADK is entitled to whatever profits it can earn from Mesinger's book.

The advice that leaving your toughts in a leanto log book is to leave them for others to read and enjoy hits the nail right on its head. There is no great whoop about this: If you don't to wish to share freely, or are worried about how what you write may be used, just don't write anything in those books (or post on VFTT) at all.

G.

Grumpy said:

The advice that leaving your toughts in a leanto log book is to leave them for others to read and enjoy hits the nail right on its head. There is no great whoop about this: If you don't to wish to share freely, or are worried about how what you write may be used, just don't write anything in those books (or post on VFTT) at all.

Click to expand...

Perhaps, but the surprise factor at seeing your lean-to entry published vs. a post on VFTT is probably fairly high!

Grumpy said:

Nice, sly slap at the Adirondack Mountain Club. I don't think those leanto journals ever were put out there for the purpose of collecting kernels of wisdom and gems of thought for the ADK to collect and publish for profit.

G.

Click to expand...

No slap, I'm a member. I'm jealous. It never occured to me. More power to them.

I'm sure he's referring to me.
I agree though for the most part, more power to them. I'll take an interesting read any day. There's a small purist part of me that isn't too happy about it though.

As I understand it, anything witten is automatically copyright of the author by international law (Bern Convention) unless he has assigned it to someone else or placed it in the public domain. I assume that, by placing the writing in a public place, one is implicitly allowing others to read it. But this does not include the right to copy or sell it. The copyright holder can make or sell specific or general permissions to others to use it in specific ways.

Caveat: I am not an intellectual property lawyer. The issue comes up for authors of technical papers etc.

Doug

Pamola said:

I'm sure he's referring to me.
I agree though for the most part, more power to them. I'll take an interesting read any day. There's a small purist part of me that isn't too happy about it though.

Click to expand...

I was referrring to the earlier post by Pamola.

I also think we actually are in agreement on this -- a small part of me, also, finds commercial publication of selected leanto journal entries somewhat off-putting even though I recognize it as a legit enterprise.

On another note:

Above, I referred to Mesinger's book as "moderately interesting." That's my reaction to it. I also could have called it "somewhat disappointing," and that would have accurately described my reaction, as well. Truth is, I've found going through the leanto journals themselves to be a lot more interesting -- more "organic." Mesinger's picked-and-chosen excerpts just don't provide the full range of commentary and style to be savored and digested.

G.

Yes, yes, keep replying folks... just more material for my upcoming book "No URL I'd Rather Be"

Muahhahahaha

cbcbd said:

Yes, yes, keep replying folks... just more material for my upcoming book "No URL I'd Rather Be"

Muahhahahaha

Click to expand...

I'm still confused, though. I'm pretty confident I've never written anything witty or compelling enough here or elsewhere to be worried about it being published or turned into a mini-series. But others have. And I link to photo albums. Does that allow someone else to publish it as theirs or as "compiled by..." ?

MITA does that too, they'll take witty entries in the canisters on some of their Islands they maintain and publish it in the newsletter they send out. I just read the Summer'06 and they have some listed there (with credit to the author) for others to read.

If you don't want to have your thoughts and entries read, you can probably be safe by writing it in the bibles that seem to frequent some leantos. Nobody ever opens those!

Jay

Jay H said:

Nobody ever opens those!

Click to expand...

That's right, I don't need to, I just carry my own



Personally I'd rather hike to a a lean-to, lay on bag and spend some time reading and enjoying the entries in the same context as the authors' than sit at home and read it there. Part of the joy of getting outside is the priviledge of reading those journal entries wherever you are.

There's definitively a market for a book like this... I don't think many of us in this forum would fit into that market.

I love reading the journals and I try to be witty in mine. In fact, my recent kayak in Maine, I forgot to bring a reading thing which I usually do so when we turned in early (like around 8pm), I brought the MITA journal into my tent and spent the next 30 minutes reading all the entries...

Back to the original thread (sorry for the drift). If somebody wants to make money off my entries, more power to them, just send a royalty check, please.

Jay

DougPaul understands it right.

DougPaul said:

As I understand it, anything witten is automatically copyright of the author by international law (Bern Convention) unless he has assigned it to someone else or placed it in the public domain. I assume that, by placing the writing in a public place, one is implicitly allowing others to read it. But this does not include the right to copy or sell it. The copyright holder can make or sell specific or general permissions to others to use it in specific ways.

Click to expand...

This is more or less agrees with the synopsis on Postings in my old desk copy of CyberLaw (Rosenoer, 1997). But this is very old stuff. Two thing that Rosenoer suggests that might negate the implicit copyright owned by the poster is: a) a terms of use agreement with users that demands thatthe poster relinguishes copyright or b) cliams by forum hosts to a compilation copyright. But, Rosenoer argues that the compilation line of reasoning is very thin noting that "In many cases, subscriber postings are simply responses to postings by other subscribers, with no participation by the online service whatsoever." The implication is that a high degree of coordination and participation by the site owner is needed to make the compilation claim.

Of course, this book is badly out of date. Rosenoer notes that there is no case law (as of 1997). Would love to see more up to the date stuff on this.

Chip said:

Seems like an easy way to make a living though...

Click to expand...

Do you really think he'll make money on this deal? A book like that is not done to make money. It is done out of love. The author probably will end up making less than a dollar for every hour he spent working on it.

Pete_Hickey said:

Do you really think he'll make money on this deal? A book like that is not done to make money. It is done out of love. The author probably will end up making less than a dollar for every hour he spent working on it.

Click to expand...

sounds kind of like the music biz.......

Pete_Hickey said:

Do you really think he'll make money on this deal? A book like that is not done to make money. It is done out of love. The author probably will end up making less than a dollar for every hour he spent working on it.

Click to expand...

Pete, yes, I assumed he thought he'd make more than minimum wage on this project, but "an easy living" in relative terms, as opposed to having to come up with his own ideas for a book. You're one of the people I had in mind when I asked this question. I don't know the law but I don't think it'd be fair to publish and sell someone elses work without compensating them. I've always felt Journal Entries and Forum Posts were for the immediate, intended audience, not for mass publication, profit and consumption.

EDITED: Apparently a couple people didn't realize I was kidding about running with this idea, but it is an interesting question.

Chip said:

Pete, yes, I assumed he thought he'd make more than minimum wage on this project, but "an easy living" in relative terms, as opposed to having to come up with his own ideas for a book.

Click to expand...

Oh, I'm sure it's as much work, if not more, than writing from scratch. It must involve a LOT of research and editting. Most of the stuff in those journals is junk.

You're one of the people I had in mind when I asked this question.

Click to expand...

Interesting. I've had my beard picture published in several magazines (I was even on the COVER of Safirir!) , and they didn't ask me (several did also) I've had my winter cycling stuff printed in several bicycling magazines... some asked me, but not all. I received no compensation other than a copy of the magazine by the ones who asked.

But that is a bit different. I'm clearly identified on my net pages. This isn't usually the case with the journals. Personally, I consider them public documents. Kind of like graffiti. I have a book. Someone went around NYC, photographing graffiti, and published it in a book. I really doubt that the artists were notified.

I've always felt Journal Entries and Forum Posts were for the immediate, intended audience, not for mass publication, profit and consumption.

Click to expand...

That's the difference between you and I. I consider it something that is given away. Similar to filling out a 'comments card' at a resturant or hotel.

Dougpaul, Mad Townie have it right (and I think dave.m's got the gist but his wording is unfortunate): anything written down (in the US since 1979(?) and any Berne convention country) is instantly, automatically copyright by its author (though in the case of a "work for hire", an employer is considered to be the "author" for this purpose). Title 17 (Copyright Act) Section 102.

There's a "fair use" exemption for scholarship, criticism, parody, etc, but a book consisting entirely of other people's log entries doesn't sound like a strong candidate (just a first impression, not legal advice). Section 107.

On the practical side, though, I think the risk of anybody suing over the copyright in their log entry is pretty low (DEFINITELY not legal advice).

As for websites, "compilation copyright" by the website owner [even if valid] does NOT negate the underlying copyright of the individual authors in their individual works (lawyers call it a "thin copyright", in a different sense). (section 103, section 201c) What purposes the website owner can re-use content for is a matter of permission from the contributors. (Except that the compiler can duplicate the whole compilation, and revised editions thereof. Section 201c.) Note that copyright *transfers* have to be in writing & signed (Section 204), but a *license* to re-use the content is another matter. A well-designed notice ("anything you post to this site I can use in my future book"), if given in advance, should be effective - basic contract law applies. Such a license doesn't actually "negate" the contributor's copyright - the contributor still has the right to dublicate, republish, etc his own comments, and can sell that right.