(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] hsw.livejournal.com at 02:57am on 16/03/2004
His estate can still assert his rights, surely, and when he published it there was an implied right asserted.

H
[parent entry] [link] [reply]
 

(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] damerell.livejournal.com at 04:45am on 16/03/2004
His estate can, sure, but that's not what it says; and I'm not sure that in the 1950s American copyright law was such that it would be necessary or useful for him to assert such a right.
[link] [parent] [reply]
 

(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] geekette8.livejournal.com at 08:26am on 16/03/2004
It doesn't say who asserted it - just that it has been asserted, Shirley?
[link] [parent] [reply]
 

(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] geekette8.livejournal.com at 08:26am on 16/03/2004
OK, I can't read. So screw me.
[link] [parent] [reply]
 

(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] damerell.livejournal.com at 08:49am on 16/03/2004
Hey, I didn't say anything... although this boilerplate is very common even when, on the face of it, it's absurd.
[link] [parent] [reply]
 

(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] damerell.livejournal.com at 08:31pm on 18/03/2004
Actually I have a better rationalisation; Pohl is entitled to speak for them both now CMK is dead, and _he_ asserts said rights on behalf of both of them.
[link] [parent] [reply]

April

SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
    1
 
 2
 
 3
 
 4
 
 5
 
6
 
 7
 
 8
 
 9
 
 10
1
 11
 
 12
 
13
 
 14
1
 15
 
 16
 
 17
 
 18
 
 19
 
20
 
 21
 
 22
 
 23
 
 24
 
 25
 
 26
 
27
 
 28
 
 29
 
 30