Re: Steven Brust Firefly Novel

On Feb 15, 10:38=EF=BF=BDam, thro...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Wayne Throop) 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. =EF=BF=BDEven if receiving it is.
>
> Hm. =EF=BF=BDWhich Heinlein mentioned somebody being aquited of
receiving
> a bribe somebody else was convicted of giving? =EF=BF=BDOr vice versa?
> SiaSL, I expect. =EF=BF=BDANYhoo, in this case, I don't think the
donat-or=

> could even be charged, only the donat-ee.
>
> Wayne Throop =EF=BF=BD thro...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 getting into the copyright discussion, but the Fall-Doheny thing
Heinlein mentioned in several places.  In the trials surrounding the
Teapot Dome scandal that tainted the Harding Administration (Harding
died just before it the national scandal erupted), Secretary of the
interior Fall was convicted of receiving a bribe (a non-do***ented,
nonrepayable "loan" or something like that) that California oil man
Doheny had earlier been aquitted of giving.