Publishing A Letter On A Website Without The Authors Permission??

[robbiebob]

If Mr A writes and sends a letter to Mr B who owns the letter and has the rights over it?? What, if any, consequences would a third party face if he published it to a website??

TIA

[boxtops]

I believe that the person who wrote the letter owns the copyright to it - IMO there could be all sorts of implications if a third party published it, breach of confidentiality being but one.

[Mosaic]

Provided the publisher has the owner's permission to put it online then the publisher is within their rights.
However, a wise online publisher would have this permission in writing before acting.
The publishing of the letter may result in all round hissy fits and removal from surprise santa lists.
Two exceptions to this: if the letter is to do with a business arrangement that specifically excludes the recipient from disclosing details and to which the recipient has agreed - common when workplace and employee have fallen out over summat; or if the letter contains technical information or other intellectual property, whose ownership would have to be determined.

[boxtops]

I'd add also that if the letter is on company notepaper and Mr A is representing the company, then it's the company which owns the letter.

[Mosaic]

Good one Boxie!

[atalanta]

If the letter has been written as part of somebody's job - for instance, a letter from the Personnel Officer to a candidate saying "the job's yours", then its copyright belongs to the employer. Any letter which is written on behalf of an employer, for the employer's purposes, which would not have been written except for the existence of the employment-relationship, is the copyright of the employer. A personal letter is the copyright of the writer and may not be published without the express permission of the writer, never mind who has received it. Putting the text of the letter on a website without permission from the writer of the text would be breach of copyright, and could result in a considerable fine. If the publication could be considered malicious, there could even be a penalty of imprisonment, if the foreseeable consequences were bad enough.

[Mosaic]

...always bearing in mind that protecting copyright is the owner's responsibility and is utlimately down to what they intend to do about it.
The moral of the story is, don't mess with Getty's letters or pictures, but the electrician down the road might not even notice.