On 28 Feb 2006 06:40:11 -0800, N9OGL wrote:
As I stated before, The courts have ruled that no matter if one person
wrote it or someone else did; the out come of the information would be
the same, and data is not copyrightable. Copyrights are there to
protect creativity, and for something to be protected under copyright
law it has to be ORGINAL, and copyright law doesn't protect the idea,
but they way the idea is expressed. fact and Information are not
copyrightable, even it this information was copyrightable,which it
isn't, it would fall into public domain because electromagnetic
radiation (waves) has been around since the 1800's and anything before
1923 is not copyrightable, and is consider, public domain.

To quote from the ruling "... is copyrightable only if its facts have
been 'selected, coordinated, or arranged in such a way that the
resulting work as a whole constitutes an original work of authorship.'"

[From http://www.techlawjournal.com/cong10...0327feist.htm]

That's why a physics text *is* copyrightable. It's also why an
explanation of electromagnetic radiation is *also* copyrightable.

Sorry, Tood. You're interpretation is seriously flawed.

P.S. Electromagnetic radiation has been around since the beginning of
the universe. It is only mankind's understanding of it which is
relatively recent.



----
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = -@B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t,"
and then there was light.