jtc at io.com
Mon Jan 20 19:24:52 PST 1997
> Now, aren't SCA mailing lists, not to mention rec.org.sca, just
> that? If not, why not? (I found the definition of publication to
> not erase my concerns, since it confused me even more as well as
> being a bit cyclical.) The key may be simply if one "holds itself
> out to be a publication of the Society or its branches" or down to
> the issue of them being "sponsored or authorized by a Society
No SCA branch of any sort sponsored or authorized me to start
RapierNet or the various Don Nets. I have never claimed either was an
SCA publication, ergo, they are not.
What they ARE is discussions ABOUT the SCA. Just as MacWorld magazine
is ABOUT products from Apple, Inc. but not CONTROLLED by Apple, Inc.
our lists are ABOUT the SCA, not owned or controlled by the SCA.
Even if an employee of Apple, Inc. owned MacWorld Magazine, that still
does not mean Apple, Inc. owned it. Just so, even though SCAers
started those lists, that DOES NOT mean the SCA Inc. has any say in
what goes on those lists.
Nor can the SCA, Inc. limit our right to discuss our SCA activities
in a public or private forum, so long as:
- We do not claim to BE an official publication of the SCA.
- We do not re-print articles from official SCA publications, or
otherwise violate their copyrights.
- We do not make slanderous or libellous statements about the SCA on a
I hope this clarifies the situation.
More information about the Ansteorra