Taber's GUIDE TO RAILROAD HISTORICAL RESOURCES


tim gilbert <tgilbert@...>
 

Kevin,

You wrote:

I ran across a reference to the following text:
Guide to Railroad Historical Resources by Thomas T. Taber III (4
volumes).
I was wondering if anyone is familiar with this work and could provide
any
insight as to its value in researching data for models. Also, would
anyone
have any clue as to the market value and possible sources for
acquiring
these books?
Tom Taber is a rail historian, and not a modeler. In the mid-1990's, he
advertised his National Railroad Historical Resource in TRAINS magazine.
When I started on my research about freight operations, I wrote him a
letter. His reply pointed me in the direction of the HK Copeland
Company's TRAFFIC ANALYSIS REPORTS which, he said, were in three
incomplete collections at the Harvard Business School Library,
Northwestern University and the St. Louis Mercantile Library. I went to
Cambridge MA, and found other documents including the OPERATING
STATISTICS OF LARGE STEAM RAILROADS which I used yesterday to the STMFC
in my replies to the question about the AT&SF.

I have only scanned the four volumes of the GUIDE TO HISTORICAL RAILROAD
RESOURCES only one - about five years ago at a Train Show - $100.00 was
the price for all four so I moved on. In retrospect, they may have been
helpful in my research because the GUIDE indexed where documents were in
repository.

Tom is interested in the 1:1 scale so the GUIDE's utility towards
modeling depends upon how one defines "modeling." The only "how to" in
the GUIDE would be how it was done on a 1:1 scale.

Perhaps, there is someone in the STMFC who has a greater knowledge of
how the GUIDE would relate to a recreation in miniature.

Two summers ago when I ran into him at English's Model RR Shop in
Montoursville PA, he said he was working on an all-time index of RAILWAY
AGE. I don't know what the status of this project is currently.

Tim Gilbert


Ron Boham <spnut@...>
 

tim gilbert wrote:

Kevin,

You wrote:

I ran across a reference to the following text:
Guide to Railroad Historical Resources by Thomas T. Taber III (4
volumes).
I was wondering if anyone is familiar with this work and could provide
any
insight as to its value in researching data for models.
Tom Taber is a rail historian, and not a modeler. In the mid-1990's, he
advertised his National Railroad Historical Resource in TRAINS magazine.
When I started on my research about freight operations, I wrote him a
letter. His reply pointed me in the direction of the HK Copeland
Company's TRAFFIC ANALYSIS REPORTS which, he said, were in three
incomplete collections at the Harvard Business School Library,
Northwestern University and the St. Louis Mercantile Library. I went to
Cambridge MA, and found other documents including the OPERATING
STATISTICS OF LARGE STEAM RAILROADS which I used yesterday to the STMFC
in my replies to the question about the AT&SF.

I have only scanned the four volumes of the GUIDE TO HISTORICAL RAILROAD
RESOURCES only one - about five years ago at a Train Show - $100.00 was
the price for all four so I moved on. In retrospect, they may have been
helpful in my research because the GUIDE indexed where documents were in
repository.
Tom is interested in the 1:1 scale so the GUIDE's utility towards
modeling depends upon how one defines "modeling." The only "how to" in
the GUIDE would be how it was done on a 1:1 scale.

Perhaps, there is someone in the STMFC who has a greater knowledge of
how the GUIDE would relate to a recreation in miniature.

Two summers ago when I ran into him at English's Model RR Shop in
Montoursville PA, he said he was working on an all-time index of RAILWAY
AGE. I don't know what the status of this project is currently.
From the R&LHS Autumn 2001 issue of _Railroad History_, #185:


_Railroad Periodicals Index 1831-1999_, compiled by Thomas T. Taber III. Published by the author (504 South Main Street, Muncy, PA 17756), 2001. 841 pp. $75.00 hardbound + CD-ROM.

The review by Kurt R. Bell (of the Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania) is glowing, the only caveat being to keep the work under 1000 pages, Taber kept the font size small, so it is sometimes hard to read. Listings are for trade press/mainstream press only, no hobby press (Trains, Model Railroader) or employee magazines. The biggest problem for most of us to use it would be to find the references cited therein. I intend to order my copy next week; I'll make a report when I receive it.

Ron Boham
Ralston, NE


Kevin Lafferty <KevinHLafferty@...>
 

Thanks for the replies concerning Taber's GUIDE TO RAILROAD HISTORICAL
RESOURCES. After some further searching it appears that this is a compendium
of archival data from universities, public and private libraries, museums,
historical societies and so forth.

Ron Boham wrote:
I intend to
order my copy next week; I'll make a report when I receive it.

Ron, I for one would be very interested in your review of this text. Please
let me know what you think of it after you have had a chance to review it.

Kevin Lafferty


johncb505 <johncb@...>
 

Taber's Guide indeed has 4 volumes of citations. They are rather
strangely organized, however. I am moderately familiar only with the
Douglas fir region of the Pacific Northwest. Here he misses many of
the (admittedly obscure and poorly known) resources pertaining to the
many private timber companies. His listings -- and the libraries --
in his native East are probably much better.

It would be a book to try to get a library to obtain rather than
owning a copy.


Ron Boham <spnut@...>
 

Kevin Lafferty wrote:

Thanks for the replies concerning Taber's GUIDE TO RAILROAD HISTORICAL
RESOURCES. After some further searching it appears that this is a compendium
of archival data from universities, public and private libraries, museums,
historical societies and so forth.

Ron Boham wrote:
I intend to
order my copy next week; I'll make a report when I receive it.

Ron, I for one would be very interested in your review of this text. Please
let me know what you think of it after you have had a chance to review it.
What I received this week was the _Railroads Periodical Index 1831-1999_. The "Books By The Author" page before the dedication lists thirty-one titles by Taber, beginning in 1947 and going up to the Index in 2001. A small note below says"A total of approximately 8,000 pages of historical material". This man is a prolific researcher, and apparently something of an old buzzard, if his first book was published the year before I was born.

The most remarkable thing to me is the book is not copyrighted! It has an ISBN number, and a little blurb saying: "Portions of this work pertaining to companies or subjects being researched may be reproduced in any manner."

The _Guide to Railroad Historical Resources (4 volumes)_ is in the title list; I see now I need to look into those. In his foreword, Taber's caveats about what was left out of the Index consume perhaps one page column; what he included goes on for 841 pages and a CD-ROM.

Ron Boham
Ralston, NE


thompson@...
 

Ron Boham said:
The most remarkable thing to me is the book is not copyrighted! It has
an ISBN number, and a little blurb saying: "Portions of this work
pertaining to companies or subjects being researched may be reproduced
in any manner."
Of course it's copyrighted, Ron. It's automatic under the law. Taber has
merely given you his permission to use it as you like. If he withdrew that
permission (not that he's likely to), it would be like any other
publication.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 http://www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroads and on Western history


D. Scott Chatfield
 

Ron Boham said:
The most remarkable thing to me is the book is not copyrighted!
and Tony T wrote:
Of course it's copyrighted, Ron. It's automatic under the law. Taber has
merely given you his permission to use it as you like. If he withdrew that
permission (not that he's likely to), it would be like any other
publication.

But isn't this work basically a bibliography of sources? You can't really
copyright a listing of OTHER peoples' works.

Scott Chatfield


thompson@...
 

Scott Chatfield sez:
But isn't this work basically a bibliography of sources? You can't really
copyright a listing of OTHER peoples' works.
That would only apply if it's ALL possible sources. Otherwise,
selectivity and knowledge are at work in the choice of items, and that's
quite copyrightable.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 http://www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroads and on Western history


Schuyler G Larrabee <SGL2@...>
 

Scott Chatfield sez:
But isn't this work basically a bibliography of sources? You can't
really
copyright a listing of OTHER peoples' works.
& Tony T says:

That would only apply if it's ALL possible sources. Otherwise,
selectivity and knowledge are at work in the choice of items, and that's
quite copyrightable.
I don't think so, Tony (though I realize you're the publisher here, and I'm
not) because compilations are NOT copyrightable, even if they have had some
editorial selectivity applied. Now, if there were (or is, I guess, in the
present case) some editorial WRITING included, making some commentary on the
relative worth of different collections or some other qualifications, then
I'd agree, but as a simple list, it's patently impossible to create a truly
comprehensive list. There's always one more . . . .

SGL


thompson@...
 

Schuyler Larrabee said:
I don't think so, Tony (though I realize you're the publisher here, and I'm
not) because compilations are NOT copyrightable, even if they have had some
editorial selectivity applied. Now, if there were (or is, I guess, in the
present case) some editorial WRITING included, making some commentary on the
relative worth of different collections or some other qualifications, then
I'd agree, but as a simple list, it's patently impossible to create a truly
comprehensive list. There's always one more . . . .
Schuyler, you are certainly right for, say, a phone book. But if you
check any book about copyright, you will find examples of compilations in
which the compiler DID obtain valid copyright on the basis of selectivity
and knowledge in the listing, ESPECIALLY if annotations about details are
provided: in Tabor's case, specifics about the various archives.
That said, even a phone book has its physical layout, its design,
copyrighted, so that even though the content is not copyrightable, the
"look and feel" is. That avenue also would be available to Tabor if he
wanted it.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 http://www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroads and on Western history


Ron Boham <spnut@...>
 

Paul W. Krueger wrote:

Ron, did he index the little news blurbs in periodicals like Railway
Age that announced new freight car orders, new rail lines, promotions,
etc.? I've spent many hours looking for needles in those haystacks
and it would truly be a godsend if he indexed this information.

Also, is the CD-ROM just a searchable version of the 841 pages?

Thanks,
Paul

At 02:48 AM 08/08/2002 -0500, you wrote:

What I received this week was the _Railroads Periodical Index
1831-1999_.......
Paul, List:

In the Preface, Taber writes:

I did a detailed indexing of at least one periodical for each year by
copying the railroad listings in the annual indexes that appeared with
each volume. This included information on incorporation, construction,
openings, extensions, abandonments, bankruptcies, reorganizations, and
other news items. I suspect that very few of these tens of thousands of
listings have value, and it was a gross waste of my time and tedium to
include them. However, I did them for the sake of completeness. The
magazines for which I did this more thorough indexing are:
American Railroad Journal 1832-1887
Railroad Record 1853-1872
Commercial and Financial Chronicle 1865-1909
Railroad Gazette 1870-1881
Railway Age 1878-1908
Railroad Age Gazette-Railway Age 1908-1930 (I did not continue after
1930 because there were so few. I did scan the articles each week and a
few I indexed.)
Railroad Magazine 1940-1953
Short Line Railroader-Steam Locomotive & Railroad Tradition 1954-1968
R&LHS Bulletin & Railroad History, Volumes 1-151, 1921-1984
NRHS Bulletin 1936-1985

I just tried to open the CD, but busted out; it's late and I'm tired.
On the cover for the CD it says it requires Microsoft Word version 5.1
or higher, so Wordpad is probably not an acceptable substitute. It also
states, "This is not intended as a substitute for the book. It lacks
about 150 pages. It is intended to be used to do random word searches
such as _pontoon_ for material on pontoon bridges." The quarterly
publications of the two historical societies are also not included on
the CD.

All of this is only half the battle; knowing where the article is one
thing, but finding a complete set of the source periodical to read or
copy from is another.

Ron Boham
Ralston, NE


Ron Boham <spnut@...>
 

thompson@... wrote:

Schuyler Larrabee said:
I don't think so, Tony.....
because compilations are NOT copyrightable, even if they have had some
editorial selectivity applied.
Schuyler, you are certainly right for, say, a phone book. But if you
check any book about copyright, you will find examples of compilations in
which the compiler DID obtain valid copyright on the basis of selectivity
and knowledge in the listing, ESPECIALLY if annotations about details are
provided: in Tabor's case, specifics about the various archives.
That said, even a phone book has its physical layout, its design,
copyrighted, so that even though the content is not copyrightable, the
"look and feel" is. That avenue also would be available to Tabor if he
wanted it.
Tony, Schuyler, List:

Tony is correct on that; I just checked two phone books, Qwest and
McLeodUSA, and both are copyrighted. What I meant in my original post,
i. e., what suprised me about Taber's book, is on the page after the
title page, where one would expect to find it, there is _no_ statement:
Copyright 2001 Thomas T. Taber, Muncy, PA. I have never seen a
copyrighted work which did not include that statement.

He does have a statement that compilation of this work was not financed
in any way by grant money or any other outside sources, his extensive
Books by the Author list, and the other statement I quoted about
"portions of this work may be reproduced in any manner", which is
probably pretty safe--who would try to pass this off as their own work?
Maybe he just didn't have room for it, but that seems unlikely; if he
filled 841 pages, having to go to 842 for one more thing would hardly
matter.

It is definitely _not_ marked as being public domain, in the manner of
the play _Our Town_, by Thorton Wilder. [Ever wonder why high school
drama departments do that one every two or three years--its free! No
royalty fee to be paid.] Unless one of our respondents in PA can go
knock on his door and ask him, we probably won't know. I find it hard
to believe it's not copyrighted, but equally hard to believe a
researcher as dogged and determined as Taber could have forgotten to so
state.

Ron Boham
Ralston, NE


thompson@...
 

Ron Boham said:
What I meant in my original post,
i. e., what suprised me about Taber's book, is on the page after the
title page, where one would expect to find it, there is _no_ statement:
Copyright 2001 Thomas T. Taber, Muncy, PA. I have never seen a
copyrighted work which did not include that statement.
It is indeed customary to include this statement but not REQUIRED since
1978; today it has no bearing on whether copyright is granted.

I find it hard
to believe it's not copyrighted, but equally hard to believe a
researcher as dogged and determined as Taber could have forgotten to so
state.
Ron, one more time: he doesn't HAVE to so state. The law provides that
copyright is in existence as soon as the work is reduced to tangible form,
i.e. written. So yes, it IS copyrighted, though Tabor gives permission for
free use.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 http://www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroads and on Western history


Roger Miener <Roger.Miener@...>
 

Tony Thompson responds to Ron Bonham and says ...

It is indeed customary to include this statement but not REQUIRED
since 1978; today it has no bearing on whether copyright is granted.
Tony, I see what you say and I know what you mean ... but what I think
you might rather have said is that "...it has no bearing on whether
copyright is *enforceable*. " As you said later in the same post ...

Ron, one more time: he doesn't HAVE to so state. The law provides
that copyright is in existence as soon as the work is reduced to
tangible form, i.e. written.
Exactly. Copyright is not granted. Copyright is not something that
one applies for, nor is it something that is granted by some
governmental authority. Copyright springs into existence
automatically at the moment that the work is created. When we hear
that someone has *applied* for something - something related to
copyright, that is - that something invariably turns out to be an
application for *registration* of the copyright. A copyright that is
registered with the Feds is more valuable than a just plain old
automatic copyright that arises at the moment of creation.

And Ron, here's something handy to keep in mind. The next time you
are looking at plans printed in a model magazine, like say the Pullman
Standard 60' Auto Parts Car drawings by James Kinkaid that appear at
pages 42 - 43 of the of the September 2002 issue of Mainline Modeler,
take note of the legend that says "Copies may be made for
noncommercial use only." What you see there is a grant of permission
from the holder of the copyright to a certain group of persons
(noncommercial users) which permission amounts to a royalty free
license. Just as is the case with your house and yard (real
property), the owner of a copyright (intellectual property) gets to
say who is welcome on the premises and who is not welcome. In the
case of the Kinkaid drawing, the owner has said that noncommercial
users are welcome. Others, unless they pay an agreed royalty, are not
welcome.

Thus, when a fella named Taber says it's OK with him that others be
allowed to do one thing or another with the material he has created -
that "OK" is coming from the fella that owns the copyright! He is
granting permission - something he could not effectively do if he
didn't own the property.

BTW, when you pick up your copy of Mainline Modeler, do you know where
to look for the notice of copyright? In the September 2002 issue it
is in the first column on page four, and about three-quarters of the
way down the column. It reads " 'c in a circle' Copyright 2002
Hundman Publishing Inc. All Rights Reserved." The notice is there
but, as Tony Thompson has pointed out, even if it weren't, these days
the magazine would still be protected by copyright.

If an author wishes to place something in the public domain - the
method used is to preface the work with the statement that the author
affirmatively dedicates his or her work to the public domain. If all
you see is silence - and the work was created in your lifetime - odds
are excellent that there is a copyright somewhere and that the work
ain't in the public domain.

Roger Miener
at Tacoma WA


thompson@...
 

Roger Miener, who unlike me actually can speak with authority on the law:
Tony, I see what you say and I know what you mean ... but what I think
you might rather have said is that "...it has no bearing on whether
copyright is *enforceable*. " As you said later in the same post ...
Yes, Roger, you are quite right. I was attempting to refer to the
pre-1978 days, during which if you failed to include that copyright notice,
you would not be granted copyright, which in those days you had to humbly
request, while being sure you followed several precise rules.
The word "grant" is indeed inoperative in the copyright world today, as
Roger clearly explains.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 http://www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroads and on Western history


Roger Miener <Roger.Miener@...>
 

Tony Thompson comments about copyright ...

Yes, Roger, you are quite right. I was attempting to refer to the
pre-1978 days
Yes, back then - the pre-1978 days - if back in those days you did not
dot your 'i's' and cross your 't's' you were dead meat. Back then, a
failure to include a notice of copyright was tantamount to being a
dedication of one's work to the public domain. Not so any more. Now,
it is just the other way around. So, the lesson is, if you are gonna
mess with something created by someone else, you better get in contact
with them and chat about it. Otherwise, you could find yourself to be
in a world of hurt -- Especially so if they have gone to the trouble
to have their copyright registered with the Feds -- That's when it
will *really* hurt.

Roger Miener
at Tacoma WA

thompson@... wrote:
Roger Miener, who unlike me actually can speak with authority on
the law:
Tony, I see what you say and I know what you mean ... but what I
think you might rather have said is that "...it has no bearing on
whether copyright is *enforceable*. " As you said later in the
same post ...
Yes, Roger, you are quite right. I was attempting to refer to the
pre-1978 days, during which if you failed to include that copyright
notice, you would not be granted copyright, which in those days you
had to humbly request, while being sure you followed several
precise rules. The word "grant" is indeed inoperative in the
copyright world today, as Roger clearly explains.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705
http://www.signaturepress.com (510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937;
e-mail, thompson@... Publishers of books on
railroads and on Western history


Garth G. Groff <ggg9y@...>
 

Roger,

A copyright infringement has to be a BIG case for the Feds to care, and even then you can only collect
only proven monetary damages.

The first railroad book I wrote was fully registered with the government. A local newspaper editor ripped
off big chunks to promote somebody else's book in a feature review (the editor laughed at me and dared me
to sue him, when all I asked for was a fair review of my own book). The copyright lawyer I consulted said
legally I had a good case, but any judge would be really pissed at me for wasting his time with such a
petty matter, and I couldn't prove any actual monetary damages. There is no "small claims" procedure for
copyright violations, and cases have to be heard by a federal court. I was completely out of luck.

Copyright law is nice to have as a deterrence, but for the little guy it has no teeth. With my two
subsequent books I didn't bother to waste money on the formal applicaiton.

Kind regards,


Garth G. Groff

Roger Miener wrote:

... Especially so if they have gone to the trouble
to have their copyright registered with the Feds -- That's when it
will *really* hurt.


Ned Carey <westernmd@...>
 

From: "Roger Miener"
Yes, back then - the pre-1978 days - if back in those days you did not
dot your 'i's' and cross your 't's' you were dead meat. Back then, a
failure to include a notice of copyright was tantamount to being a
dedication of one's work to the public domain.
So Roger, if something was published without the copyright notice before '78
it went into the public domain. Did the changes that were made in '78 give
the rights for those items back to the owner, or did those things remain in
the public domain.

Ned


Roger Miener <Roger.Miener@...>
 

Ned Carey writes ...

So Roger, if something was published without the copyright notice
before '78 it went into the public domain. Did the changes that
were made in '78 give the rights for those items back to the owner,
or did those things remain in the public domain.
Ned, with those questions we are now moving beyond my area of
professional expertise. I am a lawyer, but my interest in
intellectual property law is personal and not professional. What I
can do is recommend a tour of the web site maintained by the U. S.
Copyright Office at
http://www.loc.gov/copyright/

Once there, and if you poke around a bit, you will see that Tony and I
should have been talking about the year 1976 instead of 1978. The
major change to the law during the 1970's occurred with the passage of
the "Copyright Act of 1976, Public Law No. 94-553, 90 Statute 2541
(for the general revision of copyright law, title 17 of the *United
States Code*, and for other purposes), October 19, 1976. OK, hey, we
were close as to the date.

Should you need guidance in this area, you should contact an attorney
who specializes in this area of the law. Typically such attorneys are
also admitted to the patent bar and authorized to practice before the
U. S. Patent Office. As such, they are easy to find in the yellow
pages of the phone directory.

Prior to Ned Carey's post, Garth Groff related an unhappy experience
regards an attempt to deal with what he saw as an infringement of his
registered work. Garth concluded with ...

Copyright law is nice to have as a deterrence, but for the little
guy it has no teeth.
Garth, I don't know when this incident occurred but please go to the
web site mentioned above and go to the FAQ. There, indexed as FAQ No.
14, you will find the following ...

"Why should I register my work if copyright protection is automatic?
Registration is recommended for a number of reasons. Many choose to
register their works because they wish to have the facts of their
copyright on the public record and have a certificate of registration.
Registered works may be eligible for statutory damages and attorney's
fees in successful litigation. Finally, if registration occurs within
five years of publication, it is considered prima facie evidence in a
court of law. See Circular 1, section Copyright Registration and
Circular 38b on non-U.S. works."

Please note the mention of ability to recover statutory damages and
attorney's fees. These matters are treated in Sections 504 and 505 of
the copyright law. You can read these sections at the web site. Once
one has proved infringement, statutory damages may be awarded in lieu
of the copyright owner having to prove actual damages. Statutory
damages can be as high as $150,000.00.

Garth also stated ....

.... The copyright lawyer I consulted said
legally I had a good case, but any judge would be really pissed at
me for wasting his time with such a petty matter....
Garth, in thirty years of practice I have come to know many federal
district court judges. It is true that they exhibit a rainbow of
personalities, however, none of them come even remotely close to being
the sort of person described above. The words "pissed", "wasting" and
"petty", as they appear in the above context, strongly suggest to me
that the next time this problem comes up for you, you would be well
served to consider consulting a different lawyer.

Roger Miener
at Tacoma WA


thompson@...
 

Ned Carey asked:
So Roger, if something was published without the copyright notice
before '78 it went into the public domain. Did the changes that
were made in '78 give the rights for those items back to the owner,
or did those things remain in the public domain.
No, once in the public domain it's irreversible. Always was, still is.

Roger Miener commented:
Once there, and if you poke around a bit, you will see that Tony and I
should have been talking about the year 1976 instead of 1978. The
major change to the law during the 1970's occurred with the passage of
the "Copyright Act of 1976, Public Law No. 94-553...
Yes, as to name this is true. But the reason I and many others discussing
this topic say "1978" is that's the year it went into EFFECT. The year they
passed it is of interest to a different group.

Responding to Garth Groff's grumble, Roger also said:
Please note the mention of ability to recover statutory damages and
attorney's fees. These matters are treated in Sections 504 and 505 of
the copyright law. You can read these sections at the web site. Once
one has proved infringement, statutory damages may be awarded in lieu
of the copyright owner having to prove actual damages. Statutory
damages can be as high as $150,000.00.
Exactly. The existence of a violation is a prima facie case for these
damages. But you have to register within a few months (I forget exact
number) to be entitled to this protection.
I also share Roger's bemusement at the apparent comments of the attorney
Garth consulted. This is not a professional intellectual-property response.
Heck, Garth, sue him for malpractice <g>.
But it's true that going after a newspaper is very, very difficult,
because they have a special exemption to use materials in the "news" even
though, as in Garth's example, they are certainly known to misuse the
privilege. I do share that attorney's lack of enthusiasm to file against a
newspaper.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 http://www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroads and on Western history