This program was put together by Pat Springer and Jan Blankenship as a way to enhance the character development of “killers” in fiction. Pat comes from the perspective of a well-published author in true crime and Jan comes from a long career in the psychological arena.

Jan Blankenship is a psychotherapist in Dallas. She has been in private practice for 27 years doing counseling and management consulting. Her exposure to all types of trauma has led her to study the resilience of the human spirit, while also studying the personalities of those who harm others.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Weapons_Info/ Many errors related to weapons and the people who use them appear in television, movies, and books. We help writers, journalists, and enthusiasts. No question is too basic or detailed to ask here. This group is moderated by experts in the field, and questions will normally be answered within 48 hours, if not sooner. Feel free to ask questions about guns, blades, poisons, etc. in self-defense, military, flying, hunting, law enforcement, competitions, crime, and so on. General survival, firefighter, medical, forensics, law enforcement, hunting, disaster recovery, and MacGyver-esque questions can also be answered.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/carmelsloop/ Carmel's Research Loop is established in memory of Carmel Thomaston in order to carry on the research list she began through her website. Ask questions, share resources and answers, everyone is welcome.

Ten Common Copyright Permission Myths
By Lloyd J. Jassin

Although the First Amendment may appear unconditional on its face, the right to speak and write freely has never been absolute. Intellectual property rights often prevail over an author's "creative license." The main benefit of copyright, for example, is the right to exclude others from making copies of a work (or any part of it) without permission. By protecting an author's expression, copyright guarantees that authors and other creators derive financial benefits from their work.

If you intend to use someone's copyrighted work, unless the use is considered a "fair use" (i.e., a defense to copyright infringement), you must obtain that person's written permission. Under federal law, only the copyright owner or someone acting with the owner's authority, such as a publisher, can grant that permission. Without written permission, you expose yourself to legal risks.

While not every unauthorized use of a copyrighted work is an infringement, whenever you include another person's words, illustrations, photographs, charts or graphs in a work you publish, you must be sensitive to the risk of infringing someone's copyright.

What follows are some common copyright permission myths. Though it's human nature to try to avoid the entanglements of permissions, don't convince yourself that any one of them is true.

Myth #1: The work I want to use doesn't have a copyright notice, so I don't need permission.

Not true. Since March 1, 1989 copyright notice has been optional. Before that date, copyright notice was mandatory and a work published with no copyright notice risked loss of copyright protection if not corrected within a specified period.

Myth #2: If I give credit I don't need permission.

Giving credit means you can look at yourself in the mirror and say you are not a plagiarist. However, merely giving credit is not a defense to copyright infringement, which unlike plagiarism, has legal, not ethical, consequences. Copyright infringement is the unauthorized use of someone else's copyrighted material. By contrast, you can plagiarize material not protected by copyright simply by taking credit for it.

Myth #3: Since I'm only using a few words, I don't need permission.

Whether it is a little or a lot, it may be too much. While there are no mathematical rules, as one court has said, "you cannot escape liability by showing how much of the work you did not take." Moreover, even if what you copied was quantitatively small, it may be qualitatively important, and therefore an infringing use.

Myth #4: I don't need permission because I'm going to adapt the original work.

Copyright law grants copyright owners the exclusive right to control modifications of their works. If you add a new layer of copyrighted material to a previously existing work,
you have created a derivative work. If done without permission of the copyright owner, you may have violated the owner's copyright.

Myth #5: Since the work is in the public domain, I don't have to clear permissions.

Not necessarily. Public domain only refers to the lack of copyright protection. While copyright is very important, a work may be protected by other legal theories that survive after the copyright expires. For example, public domain artwork, particularly distinctive characters (e.g. Beatrix Potter's "Peter Rabbit" illustration), can achieve protection under trademark law and function as a logo or source identifier. Importantly, trademark rights, unlike copyright, can last forever.

Myth #6: The material I want to reproduce was posted anonymously to an online discussion or news group. That means the work is in the public domain.

Not true. Neither the ease with which users can upload or download digital information on the Internet, nor the fact that it is anonymous, places a work in the public domain. In fact, the Copyright Act specifically protects anonymous and pseudonymous works from unauthorized copying. Postings and republications of protected material, if not done with the consent of the copyright owner, may constitute copyright infringement.

Myth #7: I can always obtain permission later.

Later may be too late. Copyright owners have the unfettered right not to grant you permission. If what you need is crucial to your work, better to find out now that it is unavailable, than later. The lack of permission can result in your work being blocked or the payment of thousands of dollars in copyright damages and attorney's fees.

Myth #8: The material I want to quote is from a an out-of-print book.That means the work is in the public domain.

Not necessarily. Out-of-print does not mean out-of-copyright. When a book goes out-of-print it is a temporary state. The rights generally revert to the author, which means the underlying copyright remains unaffected.

Myth #9: Since I'm planning to use my work for nonprofit educational purposes, I don't need permission.

Not necessarily. The key question is the use, not the user. Even a nonprofit educational use can undermine the value of a copyright and constitute copyright infringement.

Myth 10: I don't need permission because the work I want to use is over 75 years old.

Not necessarily. Everything created before January 1, 1978, but unpublished (and unregistered) until after that date, may still be protected under United States copyright law. Regardless of when the author lived (or died), the copyright cannot expire until, at least, December 31, 2002. And, if the life of the author plus 50 years surpasses December 31, 2002, then that term controls. To further complicate matters, if the work is published before January 1, 2003, as a bonus, copyright protection is automatically extended until December 31, 2027. Also, bear in mind that although a work may be in the public domain in the United States, it may still be protected overseas, where the rules concerning copyright differ.


As a publisher, you want to make certain the responsibility for clearing rights is properly spelled out in your author-publisher agreement. A well-drafted publishing agreement will make acceptance of the final manuscript contingent upon the author's timely delivery of satisfactory permission letters. You can make authors mindful of what you need by asking them to "represent" in writing that their work is original (except for those materials for which permissions are required) and not in the public domain. Also, have them warrant that their work does not infringe any copyright or other proprietary rights, including the right of privacy or publicity, and that it does not contain material that is either scandalous, obscene, libelous or otherwise contrary to the law. To further limit your risk, ask them to indemnify you for damages and costs incurred as a result of any breach of their representations and warranties. An "indemnification" means that if they breach their warranties, or a legal claim is made, they will pay your legal fees and damages.

-- Excerpted from The Copyright Permission and Libel Handbook: A Step-by-Step Guide for Writers, Editors and Publishers (John Wiley and Sons), by Lloyd J. Jassin and Steven C. Schechter.


This article originally appeared in Independent Publisher Magazine. The author acknowledges the help of Steven C. Schechter in the preparation of this article.
© 1998. Lloyd J. Jassin. All Rights Reserved.

Reprinted from Wheatmark http://www.wheatmark.com