Indeed, looking at the large BBS's that survived the transition and those that died is a grand look at how businesses change. The story of how BBS's transformed into ISP's is a central part of the story.
Exec-PC was, indeed, a large BBS. It was not the largest though - that honour went to Canada Remote Systems (CRS Online) in Toronto.
CRS ran PCBoard software on over 230 nodes. In 1993/94, that was the biggest board around - anywhere in the world.
But CRS could not survive the transition to ISP. It fumbled horribly.
In a nutshell - many of CRS' customers were FIdoNet enthusiasts. When dial-up ISP's started, there was no easy client interface avilable to permit CRS customers to keep Fidonet access. CRS fumbled the ball by trying to go to a custom (and buggy) client for dial up access to their ISP which allowed for Fido.
It was a collosal failure and a horrible client.
CRS died a fiery death in late 1995. They tried to keep to the old ways - and paid the price.
An interesting sidenote is that in Toronto at the same time, a tiny competing BBS, Computerlink Online emerged as a power house which killed CRS and became one of the greatest success stories of the BBS era.
Computerlink originally started up as a "support" board for its owners, who operated a sleazy software rental company, located in a run down strip mall in the west end of Toronto.
As you might imagine, the whole concept of software rental was simply a scam for legalized software piracy. Members of Computerlink paid for a mebership and then, for about $9 more per rental, they got a copy of the original software to take home overnight. You then copied those floppies as fast as you could.
Members of the software rental club also got access to Computerlink's "support" BBS system. The BBS was basically an attempt to create something to justify the cost of "membership" in the software rental club. It was little more than a transparent attempt to provide some legitimacy for the "membership cost" to local law enforcement authorities.
In 1994/95, as part of the phased in scheduling of NAFTA, the Canadian government amended the Copyright Act and outlawed software rental.
The core business of Computerlink was out of business at the stroke of a pen. Not all was lost though, as Computerlink's BBS had grown successfully and had become a decent little chat board with close to 30 lines. In expanding it from its original 4 lines, Computerlink gained valuable skills at managing the addition of phone lines to an existing system. Computerlink was moderately successful, but CRS Online was much too large and established to compete against as a full fledged monthly membership online service.
Forced to change its business with the outlawing of the software rental business, and unable to compete head to head against CRS Online, Computerlink decided to expand by setting up another dial up access system (sharing their existing phone lines) to run one of the first public access ISP dial-ups in Canada.
There were others out there, and many had a head start, but Computerlink had gained valuable skills on the BBS side from adding phone lines to its system while still managing to to keep it all running.
Were they successful?:-)
They grew like topsy. Computerlink grew and grew and its dial up division became "Internet Direct" -Canada's largest "independent ISP". At its height (before @Home), Internet Direct was Bell Canada's single largest customer in Canada. Bigger even than the Federal Government.
But - the story gets better!
As part of a parallel service it provided to BBS users, Computerlnk ALSO developed an HTML based web site for making free downloaded shareware available to its IP users - just like on the Computerlink BBS.
The web site? Well, you guys might have heard of the site. It had a real stupid name. They called it TUCOWS.
The original owners of Computerlink took their 4 line BBS from 1992, and by the time John Nemanic and his partners cashed out in 1999, they sold Internet Direct and Tucows.com for well over Five Hundred ("500") Million Dollars.
One remarkable software release that was not mentioned was Seth Hamilton's "RoboBoard".
Robo was notable as the BBS precursor to HTML and Mosaic. In fact, it took HTML several years to rerach the level of graphical functionality that Robo had built in.
Quite simply, RoboBoard was the graphical model for Netscape-nee-NCSA Mosaic.
That said, as Seth told me in 1998, "on the day Netscape was released, our orders for Robo came to a dead stop. My business was instantly over."
Seth went on in the biz and still develops for the online community. Last time I checked, he made Web Monitoring software which permits a Webmaster to monitor hits and visitors loading pages in realtime, measuring load speed and so forth.
It struck me that RoboBoard would be a good piece of software to close off your documntary, as a transition/ seque-way to Netscape and the end of the BBS era.
Paterniti is an award winning writer. His style is over the top - but his approach of looking for meaning where maybe there is none is most appropriate to the subject matter.
The same author wrote Driving Albert's Brain. He isn't a reporter - he's a *writer*, and an excellent one at that.
In my opinion - the piece is brilliantly written and is easily on par with Douglas Coupland. To be honest - I >>WISH I could write this well.
The original poster's comments were appreciative and insightful - your reply is the usual kneejerk reaction that twits make when look at a painting beyond their comprehension.
Turn your computer off for a week - you need to go read a real book - something not published by Tor, okay?
Of all the articles I have read linked off of slashdot - I was disappointed the MOST by the end of this one. Well - not the end, per se; rather, I was depressed the article ended at all. I wanted the story to go on.
The topic is so huge in its implications that it deserves Paterniti's over-the-top writing style. If I recall correctly - this article is from the same author who wrote "Driving Albert's Brain". In my opinion - this piece is much better.
Never mind the hidden corporate agenda and the science of this Quest for the Holy Grail. Like Coupland's original short story "Microserfs" in Wired many years ago, *this* short piece by Paterniti demands to be a book.
Paterniti may sometimes look for meaning where there is none - but damn it - he does come close to finding it just the same. Very well written piece. This article is worth doing a "save as" folks.
Precisely. Use the word "contamination" and suddenly every Jovian microbe-hugger in the world crawls out and says "Bravo!" Use the word "colonization" or "terraforming", well now that's another story isn't it? I'd imagine every nanotech and biotech nut on Slashdot would have an opinion on how to do it best, wouldn't they? (That's a much better thread too, if you ask me). Really - lets think about this. Yes - I guess we DO want to study extra-terrestial lifeforms if we can. But is it REALLY at all likely that our Terran microbes could live to supplant a Europan ecosystem (if there is one) before we get there to look at it **before** we wipe it out on purpose? No. Not likely and it is not even remotely a real possibility. If it was - then by definition, such lifeform wasn't that different an organism from our native life anyways - and therefore arguably, not so terribly interesting (other than for the critical fact that it IS so similar). So what if there is life there? What if we go there *cough* (which is what this is really all about) *cough* and find out that we could terraform the planet, or at least, seed it for Terran DNA colonization? Don't we mean to do just that? Do you think for ONE MINUTE that our "Official Plan" is REALLY to look for barren rocks to colonize and leave all possible life bearing planets to their native dumn-luck-chances? No. That is NOT the plan and we need to get that clear right NOW. We respect sentient life. But if its Euopropan microbes vs. Terran Algae - the Algae wins every single god-damned time. Same goes for even one Strep Bacillus. Are we clear on this point? Moreover, we only contaminate the planet in some meaningful way if our life-forms supplant native ones. Frankly, the thought that we could get an earthbased microbe to flourish on Europa is the kind of thing that we could justify spending a few generations of our best and brightest minds on together with significant portions of GDP for that VERY EXPRESS PURPOSE. Admittedly - I am not a fan of wiping out a life-form before we can get a chance to study it. But -for the record NASA - Eupropa is NOT for the Europans. That moon is OURS. We clear on that? If you don't agree - find work elsewhere. My honest opinion on this though - it has nothing to do with pollution control, this is SPIN Control. This is about budgets and Congress. Congress won't fund a mission to Mars (or Europa) to go look for rocks. Rocks aren't worth a trillion dollars - not even pretty red ones from Mars. A search for life IS worth that money. Ever since NASA opined that life may be/once was on Mars from some VERY equivocal pictures of a supposed microbial fossil on an old meteorite, NASA has suddenly found itself BACK in the manned space mission game. So. This isn't about saving Europan microbes from a Terran DNA holocaust - its about making people think that NASA reasonably believes there might actually BE microbes there in the first place. And therefore, we all should too. "I WANT TO BELIVE". Nothing more, nothing less. Once people start talking seriously about "saving Europan microbes", its a short hop to persuading them to pay for NASA to go look at them. That's what this whole water/life on Mars slant has been about folks. It's the only hook that NASA knows will get them funding. More power to em. But save Europan microbes from Terran DNA? Puhleeze....Robert
I thought the approach of the court was both innovative and of broad and sweeping application.
IMO, this case will be persuasive should a similar matter come before the Federal Court of Canada.
Two other matters are rasied by this appeal:
1 - I assume there was an undertaking as to damages by Sony in this case should they ulitmately fail to secure a permanent injunction. Such undertaking would apply to its own interim injunction being overturned. It follows that Connectix will be firing out excessive expectation loss estimates re: its lost sales and submitting the bill for Sony to pay. In other words, Sony is likely to have to cut a substantial cheque to the Defendant in this case.
2- We can also expect that Connectix will be relying on this case for its inevitable PSX2 emulator. Look for work on that to have begun 0 oh - today:-)
3 - Lastly, that plague of a thing called the DMCA was not relied on before the court in this case. While it may be of significatn use, I hasten to point out that the DMCA is a virus which has not spread out of the USA - and is not likely to for some time. Upshot - a PSX/2 emulator will doubtless be available in Canada and Europe, even if it is not made for the USA.
The coproration carrying on the business which has been the subject of the injunction is ICravtetv.com Inc, incorporated pursuant to the Ontario BCA, as far as I know, and carrying on business here, not in Pittsburgh.
The quick answer is this: the PPIttsburgh judge didn't use American law or Canadian law either.
A mandatory order in respect of any activity in another jurisdiction is without foundation in law.
I assume this was obtained on an ex parte motion, done simply to make ICrave file an appearance later on to fight it on a forum non conveniens basis. This will increase legal costs for ICrave or leave ICrave with an order outstanding against if and when the matter comes before The Superior Court of Ontario.
US Counsel should have stuck to an action for damages instead of an injunction. Speaking from experience, an Ontario judge will not even pay *lip service* to judicial comity if he/she sees an American court purport to make a mandatory order to have effect in Ontario. Quite the opposite - an Ontario judge will be pissed off as all hell at the mere existence of such an Order. You'll have any judge in Toronto simply *antagonized* the instant he reads the motion record.
You want to start a motion with the judge unloading on you before you even open your mouth? Not in my "top ten tips" book for how to win at motions court at 130 Queen.
Very bad strategy on part of US counsel if you ask me.
This is the point where the non-lawyers - especially the non-Canadian lawyers, are assuming they know the law when - in fact - they don't.
Actually, the story which reported on this is totally fraught with innacuracy and misunderstanding.
First - do NOT presume to apply the law of American broadcasting or copyright to Canada. Our copyright laws, particularly with respect to rebroadcast rights are different - and the laws of Canada and England do NOT recognize the tort of unfair competition or ANY exclusive right to broadcast an event (such as the Superbowl). (That is why Canadian "live" events are technically tape delayed).
The tort of unfair competition is the key to understanding this case. Canada does not recoginize it. The legal conclusions which flow from this split in the common law are potentially VERY large in this case.
Second - this was an interim injunction without foundation in law or jurisidiction. It is ABSURD to suggest that ANY American judge has jurisdiction to make a mandatory order in respect of an activity carried on in another country. There is simply no jurisdiction to make any such order. The order is so *laughable* in this regard as to stretch my belief that such was ever made in the first place.
The story is unclear in the actual facts, but I would assume that the so-called "key Court battle" was merely an ex parte injunction, made without even an appearance filed on behalf of ICrave, as to file such an appearance for any purpose (other than to oppose on grounds of forum non conveniens) would attorn to the jurisdiction of the American court - which Icrave clearly will not do.
To sum up:
The story's author obviously does not know what he/she is talking about and probably wrote this story based on a press release;
There *are* substantial differences in Canadian and American law regarding re-broadcast rights and copyright and it is Canadian law - not American law which applies;
Canadian law does not recognize the tort of unfair competition;
An American court has no jursidiction to make a mandatory order of any kind regarding an activity carried on in another jurisidiction - and there is not even a *scintilla* of legal doubt regarding that statement.
End result: whoever writes this stuff for C/Net doesn't have a clue as to the topic matter of what they presume to be writing about.
Consequently, most of the posters in this thread don't either...
The so called verbatim notes, where a student acts as an emenuensis of the professor, are indeed a fixing of the actual words and performace of the prof and would be protected by copyright. This is not news and is unquestioned as trite law. Non verbatim notes, however, are not the fixing of a performance, but the distillation of ideas expressed through words. They would not be subject to IP rights at law, unless the quotation was direct and extensive. Even so, it would be a value added derivitive work with a secondary copyright cobbled on by the note-taker. All of this is beside the point. The agressive use of copyright to strangle free discussion of ideas, whether it be through this claim over IP or the Scientologists, is dangerous. Doubly so when advocated by professional educators.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed, looking at the large BBS's that survived the transition and those that died is a grand look at how businesses change. The story of how BBS's transformed into ISP's is a central part of the story.
:-)
:-)
Exec-PC was, indeed, a large BBS. It was not the largest though - that honour went to Canada Remote Systems (CRS Online) in Toronto.
CRS ran PCBoard software on over 230 nodes. In 1993/94, that was the biggest board around - anywhere in the world.
But CRS could not survive the transition to ISP. It fumbled horribly.
In a nutshell - many of CRS' customers were FIdoNet enthusiasts. When dial-up ISP's started, there was no easy client interface avilable to permit CRS customers to keep Fidonet access. CRS fumbled the ball by trying to go to a custom (and buggy) client for dial up access to their ISP which allowed for Fido.
It was a collosal failure and a horrible client.
CRS died a fiery death in late 1995. They tried to keep to the old ways - and paid the price.
An interesting sidenote is that in Toronto at the same time, a tiny competing BBS, Computerlink Online emerged as a power house which killed CRS and became one of the greatest success stories of the BBS era.
Computerlink originally started up as a "support" board for its owners, who operated a sleazy software rental company, located in a run down strip mall in the west end of Toronto.
As you might imagine, the whole concept of software rental was simply a scam for legalized software piracy. Members of Computerlink paid for a mebership and then, for about $9 more per rental, they got a copy of the original software to take home overnight. You then copied those floppies as fast as you could.
Members of the software rental club also got access to Computerlink's "support" BBS system. The BBS was basically an attempt to create something to justify the cost of "membership" in the software rental club. It was little more than a transparent attempt to provide some legitimacy for the "membership cost" to local law enforcement authorities.
In 1994/95, as part of the phased in scheduling of NAFTA, the Canadian government amended the Copyright Act and outlawed software rental.
The core business of Computerlink was out of business at the stroke of a pen. Not all was lost though, as Computerlink's BBS had grown successfully and had become a decent little chat board with close to 30 lines. In expanding it from its original 4 lines, Computerlink gained valuable skills at managing the addition of phone lines to an existing system. Computerlink was moderately successful, but CRS Online was much too large and established to compete against as a full fledged monthly membership online service.
Forced to change its business with the outlawing of the software rental business, and unable to compete head to head against CRS Online, Computerlink decided to expand by setting up another dial up access system (sharing their existing phone lines) to run one of the first public access ISP dial-ups in Canada.
There were others out there, and many had a head start, but Computerlink had gained valuable skills on the BBS side from adding phone lines to its system while still managing to to keep it all running.
Were they successful?
They grew like topsy. Computerlink grew and grew and its dial up division became "Internet Direct" -Canada's largest "independent ISP". At its height (before @Home), Internet Direct was Bell Canada's single largest customer in Canada. Bigger even than the Federal Government.
But - the story gets better!
As part of a parallel service it provided to BBS users, Computerlnk ALSO developed an HTML based web site for making free downloaded shareware available to its IP users - just like on the Computerlink BBS.
The web site? Well, you guys might have heard of the site. It had a real stupid name. They called it TUCOWS.
The original owners of Computerlink took their 4 line BBS from 1992, and by the time John Nemanic and his partners cashed out in 1999, they sold Internet Direct and Tucows.com for well over Five Hundred ("500") Million Dollars.
Not bad at all.
Man, my nostalgia for this is *very* strong.
One remarkable software release that was not mentioned was Seth Hamilton's "RoboBoard".
Robo was notable as the BBS precursor to HTML and Mosaic. In fact, it took HTML several years to rerach the level of graphical functionality that Robo had built in.
Quite simply, RoboBoard was the graphical model for Netscape-nee-NCSA Mosaic.
That said, as Seth told me in 1998, "on the day Netscape was released, our orders for Robo came to a dead stop. My business was instantly over."
Seth went on in the biz and still develops for the online community. Last time I checked, he made Web Monitoring software which permits a Webmaster to monitor hits and visitors loading pages in realtime, measuring load speed and so forth.
It struck me that RoboBoard would be a good piece of software to close off your documntary, as a transition/ seque-way to Netscape and the end of the BBS era.
Paterniti is an award winning writer. His style is over the top - but his approach of looking for meaning where maybe there is none is most appropriate to the subject matter.
The same author wrote Driving Albert's Brain. He isn't a reporter - he's a *writer*, and an excellent one at that.
In my opinion - the piece is brilliantly written and is easily on par with Douglas Coupland. To be honest - I >>WISH I could write this well.
The original poster's comments were appreciative and insightful - your reply is the usual kneejerk reaction that twits make when look at a painting beyond their comprehension.
Turn your computer off for a week - you need to go read a real book - something not published by Tor, okay?
.Robert
Of all the articles I have read linked off of slashdot - I was disappointed the MOST by the end of this one. Well - not the end, per se; rather, I was depressed the article ended at all. I wanted the story to go on.
The topic is so huge in its implications that it deserves Paterniti's over-the-top writing style. If I recall correctly - this article is from the same author who wrote "Driving Albert's Brain". In my opinion - this piece is much better.
Never mind the hidden corporate agenda and the science of this Quest for the Holy Grail. Like Coupland's original short story "Microserfs" in Wired many years ago, *this* short piece by Paterniti demands to be a book.
Paterniti may sometimes look for meaning where there is none - but damn it - he does come close to finding it just the same. Very well written piece. This article is worth doing a "save as" folks.
.Robert
Precisely. Use the word "contamination" and suddenly every Jovian microbe-hugger in the world crawls out and says "Bravo!" Use the word "colonization" or "terraforming", well now that's another story isn't it? I'd imagine every nanotech and biotech nut on Slashdot would have an opinion on how to do it best, wouldn't they? (That's a much better thread too, if you ask me). Really - lets think about this. Yes - I guess we DO want to study extra-terrestial lifeforms if we can. But is it REALLY at all likely that our Terran microbes could live to supplant a Europan ecosystem (if there is one) before we get there to look at it **before** we wipe it out on purpose? No. Not likely and it is not even remotely a real possibility. If it was - then by definition, such lifeform wasn't that different an organism from our native life anyways - and therefore arguably, not so terribly interesting (other than for the critical fact that it IS so similar). So what if there is life there? What if we go there *cough* (which is what this is really all about) *cough* and find out that we could terraform the planet, or at least, seed it for Terran DNA colonization? Don't we mean to do just that? Do you think for ONE MINUTE that our "Official Plan" is REALLY to look for barren rocks to colonize and leave all possible life bearing planets to their native dumn-luck-chances? No. That is NOT the plan and we need to get that clear right NOW. We respect sentient life. But if its Euopropan microbes vs. Terran Algae - the Algae wins every single god-damned time. Same goes for even one Strep Bacillus. Are we clear on this point? Moreover, we only contaminate the planet in some meaningful way if our life-forms supplant native ones. Frankly, the thought that we could get an earthbased microbe to flourish on Europa is the kind of thing that we could justify spending a few generations of our best and brightest minds on together with significant portions of GDP for that VERY EXPRESS PURPOSE. Admittedly - I am not a fan of wiping out a life-form before we can get a chance to study it. But -for the record NASA - Eupropa is NOT for the Europans. That moon is OURS. We clear on that? If you don't agree - find work elsewhere. My honest opinion on this though - it has nothing to do with pollution control, this is SPIN Control. This is about budgets and Congress. Congress won't fund a mission to Mars (or Europa) to go look for rocks. Rocks aren't worth a trillion dollars - not even pretty red ones from Mars. A search for life IS worth that money. Ever since NASA opined that life may be/once was on Mars from some VERY equivocal pictures of a supposed microbial fossil on an old meteorite, NASA has suddenly found itself BACK in the manned space mission game. So. This isn't about saving Europan microbes from a Terran DNA holocaust - its about making people think that NASA reasonably believes there might actually BE microbes there in the first place. And therefore, we all should too. "I WANT TO BELIVE". Nothing more, nothing less. Once people start talking seriously about "saving Europan microbes", its a short hop to persuading them to pay for NASA to go look at them. That's what this whole water/life on Mars slant has been about folks. It's the only hook that NASA knows will get them funding. More power to em. But save Europan microbes from Terran DNA? Puhleeze... .Robert
I am also a lawyer, though not an American one.
:-)
I thought the approach of the court was both innovative and of broad and sweeping application.
IMO, this case will be persuasive should a similar matter come before the Federal Court of Canada.
Two other matters are rasied by this appeal:
1 - I assume there was an undertaking as to damages by Sony in this case should they ulitmately fail to secure a permanent injunction. Such undertaking would apply to its own interim injunction being overturned. It follows that Connectix will be firing out excessive expectation loss estimates re: its lost sales and submitting the bill for Sony to pay. In other words, Sony is likely to have to cut a substantial cheque to the Defendant in this case.
2- We can also expect that Connectix will be relying on this case for its inevitable PSX2 emulator. Look for work on that to have begun 0 oh - today
3 - Lastly, that plague of a thing called the DMCA was not relied on before the court in this case. While it may be of significatn use, I hasten to point out that the DMCA is a virus which has not spread out of the USA - and is not likely to for some time. Upshot - a PSX/2 emulator will doubtless be available in Canada and Europe, even if it is not made for the USA.
Regards.
.Robert
But that is a technical contact address.
The coproration carrying on the business which has been the subject of the injunction is ICravtetv.com Inc, incorporated pursuant to the Ontario BCA, as far as I know, and carrying on business here, not in Pittsburgh.
This is not a small point.
The quick answer is this: the PPIttsburgh judge didn't use American law or Canadian law either.
A mandatory order in respect of any activity in another jurisdiction is without foundation in law.
I assume this was obtained on an ex parte motion, done simply to make ICrave file an appearance later on to fight it on a forum non conveniens basis. This will increase legal costs for ICrave or leave ICrave with an order outstanding against if and when the matter comes before The Superior Court of Ontario.
US Counsel should have stuck to an action for damages instead of an injunction. Speaking from experience, an Ontario judge will not even pay *lip service* to judicial comity if he/she sees an American court purport to make a mandatory order to have effect in Ontario. Quite the opposite - an Ontario judge will be pissed off as all hell at the mere existence of such an Order. You'll have any judge in Toronto simply *antagonized* the instant he reads the motion record.
You want to start a motion with the judge unloading on you before you even open your mouth? Not in my "top ten tips" book for how to win at motions court at 130 Queen.
Very bad strategy on part of US counsel if you ask me.
Robert Trifts
Barrister & Solicitor, ON.
This is the point where the non-lawyers - especially the non-Canadian lawyers, are assuming they know the law when - in fact - they don't.
Actually, the story which reported on this is totally fraught with innacuracy and misunderstanding.
First - do NOT presume to apply the law of American broadcasting or copyright to Canada. Our copyright laws, particularly with respect to rebroadcast rights are different - and the laws of Canada and England do NOT recognize the tort of unfair competition or ANY exclusive right to broadcast an event (such as the Superbowl). (That is why Canadian "live" events are technically tape delayed).
The tort of unfair competition is the key to understanding this case. Canada does not recoginize it. The legal conclusions which flow from this split in the common law are potentially VERY large in this case.
Second - this was an interim injunction without foundation in law or jurisidiction. It is ABSURD to suggest that ANY American judge has jurisdiction to make a mandatory order in respect of an activity carried on in another country. There is simply no jurisdiction to make any such order. The order is so *laughable* in this regard as to stretch my belief that such was ever made in the first place.
The story is unclear in the actual facts, but I would assume that the so-called "key Court battle" was merely an ex parte injunction, made without even an appearance filed on behalf of ICrave, as to file such an appearance for any purpose (other than to oppose on grounds of forum non conveniens) would attorn to the jurisdiction of the American court - which Icrave clearly will not do.
To sum up:
The story's author obviously does not know what he/she is talking about and probably wrote this story based on a press release;
There *are* substantial differences in Canadian and American law regarding re-broadcast rights and copyright and it is Canadian law - not American law which applies;
Canadian law does not recognize the tort of unfair competition;
An American court has no jursidiction to make a mandatory order of any kind regarding an activity carried on in another jurisidiction - and there is not even a *scintilla* of legal doubt regarding that statement.
End result: whoever writes this stuff for C/Net doesn't have a clue as to the topic matter of what they presume to be writing about.
Consequently, most of the posters in this thread don't either...
Robert Trifts
LLB, (Ontario)
The so called verbatim notes, where a student acts as an emenuensis of the professor, are indeed a fixing of the actual words and performace of the prof and would be protected by copyright. This is not news and is unquestioned as trite law. Non verbatim notes, however, are not the fixing of a performance, but the distillation of ideas expressed through words. They would not be subject to IP rights at law, unless the quotation was direct and extensive. Even so, it would be a value added derivitive work with a secondary copyright cobbled on by the note-taker. All of this is beside the point. The agressive use of copyright to strangle free discussion of ideas, whether it be through this claim over IP or the Scientologists, is dangerous. Doubly so when advocated by professional educators.