When you write copy you have
the right to copyright the copy
you write. You can write good
and copyright but copyright
doesn't mean copy good - it
might not be right good copy,
right?
Now, writers of religious
services write rite, and thus
have the right to copyright the
rite they write.
Conservatives write right
copy, and have the right to
copyright the right copy they
write. A right wing cleric
might write right rite, and
have the right to copyright the
right rite he has the right to
write. His editor has the job of
making the right rite copy
right before the copyright
would be right. Then it might
be copy good copyright.
Should Thom Wright decide to
write, then Wright might write
right rite, which Wright has a
right to copyright. Copying
that rite would copy Wright's
right rite, and thus violate
copyright, so Wright would
have the legal right to right
the wrong. Right?
Legals write writs which is a
right or not write writs right
but all writs, copied or not,
are writs that are copyright.
Judges make writers write
writs right.
Advertisers write copy which
is copyright the copy writer's
company, not the right of the
writer to copyright. But the
copy written is copyrighted as
written, right?
Wrongfully copying a right
writ, a right rite or copy is not
right.
Copyright 1991 Shelley Herman
S.P.E.B.S.Q.S.A., Whittier
Chapter.
Adapted and Appended by Scott
Simmerman. If you wish to copy
or write
this as copy, please be certain to
copy right the copyright --
contributed to
Swenny's E-Mail Funnies by
Carter Olson, St. Paul, MN
source-www.squarewheels.com
