On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:01 PM, Ben Finney <ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au> wrote: [Ben Finney] > Is that by definition – i.e. that, if a jurisdiction does not behave > that way, you disqualify them from being a “sane jurisdiction”? > > Or do you have a set of sane jurisdictions that isn't dependent on that > behaviour, and have evidentiary support for your being fairly certain > they behave in the manner you describe?
I appreciate your giving me an opportunity to learn something new, and here is what I learned, and how it affects the topic. I see you have an Australian (.au) address. I assume you became defensive since there is no 'fair use' in the AU fair dealing law. In a paper published by the Australian Copyright Council, it breaks it down as you're not allowed to use anything without permission, with the exceptions that you do not need permission if what you are using is not an important or distinctive part of the copyright material, nor if usage falls within explicit fair dealing exceptions (which allow for research on the subject, reviewing the subject, news relating to the subject, subject based attorney needs, or private or internal usage by individual or company). Which, to this non-lawyer, sounds very much like US copyright law, and the 'important or distinctive part of the copyright material' sounds a lot like the 'sane' version of fair use, albeit under a different name. The exceptions given that allow for certain cases to ignore copyright do not include documentation of software that is meant to be distributed. For the case in point, if this is the governing law of the documentation issue, from what I can tell, there would be no issues with translating a work under any system, so long as the translation is for personal use only. However, no portion of the translation (large or small) would be allowable if it is decided that the translation itself is copyrighted by the company which has created the translation database. As you asked a fairly personal question (my usage of 'sane'), to answer it directly.. what I, myself, considers sane is 'you can't copy and distribute copyrighted works, without regard for copyright, if what is copied is a substantial portion of the original work'. If you disagree that is sane, that is your human right, but I will differ on the point. -- -Felyza -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAHzo7KL47aUWxiPiB+ytAYqFTPbe45bL+Cuat6t5-iBk=qp...@mail.gmail.com
