Re: Steven Brust Firefly Novel

In article <1203100708@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Wayne Throop <throopw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>::: Unless he has the express written permission of Joss Whedon and co. 
>::: that donantion may violate not just copyright but trademark. 
>
>:: Brust's distribution of the novel may violate copyright and
>:: trademark, but in what way would donations to Brust violate either? 
>
>: Making a PROFIT off a someone else's copyrighted and trademarked work
>: is what lawyers are made for. 
>
>And since I don't make a profit if I donate, I'm safe,
>and the donation isn't illegal.  Even if receiving it is.
>
>Hm.  Which Heinlein mentioned somebody being aquited of receiving
>a bribe somebody else was convicted of giving?  Or vice versa?
>SiaSL, I expect.  ANYhoo, in this case, I don't think the donat-or
>could even be charged, only the donat-ee.

	It's in SiaSL and it's a reference to Albert Fall (who was
convicted of accepting bribes) and Edward Doheny (who was acquited
of bribing Fall). 

ObSF: Doheny is Larry Niven's maternal grandfather.
-- 
http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
http://www.cafepress.com/jdnicoll
(For all your "The problem with
defending the English language [...]" T-****rt, cup and tote-bag needs)