On 3 Nov 98, Kathy E. Gill wrote:
> Would be interesting to see if anyone challenges this based on the
> "supplementary" or "av" exceptions in Suzanne's list -- particulary on a
> site with no "design" and no original art, just a bit of code wrapper (and
> not particularly good code either).
It would take a pretty resourceful attorney to find any cause for action
here, I think.
I'm assuming that your client already owned the "Delta Toxicology" logo
prior to commissioning her original site, and wrote most of the copy; in my
view, these elements would constitute the only potentially contentious
components on the site. That is, they're the only "creative" components
as per the criteria of the Copyright Act. Generic HTML code doesn't
qualify, not unless (and this is a long shot) it's assembled in some highly
innovative way that gives the overall site a very distinct "look and feel" or
functionality.
Or so goes my take on the relevant law, anyway.
-----------
Brent Eades, Almonte, Ontario
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Town of Almonte site: http://www.almonte.com/
Business site: http://www.federalweb.com
____________________________________________________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Join The Web Consultants Association : Register on our web site Now
Web Consultants Web Site : http://just4u.com/webconsultants
If you lose the instructions All subscription/unsubscribing can be done
directly from our website for all our lists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
