On Jan 16, 2008 10:30 AM, Eeli Kaikkonen wrote: >I meant that the illegal copyrighted text sharing has not stopped other projects offering that possibility.
a) A distinction needs to be made between the gratis, and non-gratis Bible Study Programs here. b) One also has to look at how the different organizations "restrict" user-created resources; c) A significant percentage of material that is not in the public domain, but was until the DMCA was passed, owes its origins to a site that shut down in early 2000. That material is still being distributed for some Bible Study programs. > if a company wants to gain success by offering a feature which will be used > for piracy, they are morally in a very strange position if they at the same > time don't take any responsibility of the resource sharing AND require that > people honor their intellectual property. What happens is that the user uploads the material to esnips, or similar site. Since the Bible Study program is not the copyright owner of the material, it can't issue a DMCA take down notice. If the copyright owner refuses to admit that the material is available in that format, and is being distributed in violation of copyright, there is not much that the Bible Study Program Creators can do. The utility program for creating resources may have a EULA, but how is it going to be enforced if the person who violates it lives outside of the jurisdiction of the creator of that tool? Or if the person lives in a country that does not honour either copyrights or EULAs. Peter wrote: >There is no such thing as intellectual property. There are copyrights and a few more - quite separate - concepts like patents and trademarks. The Jehovah's Witness CD is protected by: * Trade secret; * Copyright law; * End User Licence Agreement; Logos resources are covered by EULAs, and Trade Secrets. Most of them are also covered by copyright. It is much easier to use the phrase "Intellectual Property Rights", than copyright, patents, trade secrets, EULAs, etc, as applicable to the specific resource. >Wrt copyrights - these are different from country to country. What is perfectly legal in Germany might be forbidden in the UK or in the USA Crosswire is based out of the US, and hence falls under US law. Hence material it releases has to be legal under US Law. It helps if it is also legal under the laws of other countries. >As long as we do not offer copyrighted modules or offer the unchecked ability to upload copyrighted stuff onto the actual site, there is little we should worry about this matter. That is more or less what Rick Meyers thought, when he released the specifications for some e-Sword module types. A cottage industry arose, with users creating and distribution resources that the publisher never authorized distribution of. That did blacken the reputation of e-Sword in publishing circles. It literally has only been in the last eighteen months, and the changes in specific programs for creating e-Sword resources, that that situation has changed. > if their primary reason of existence is something unequivocally legal and good (production of new free modules). I've had that debate before. The individual that lived in the US realized the error of their ways, when they discovered that there was a very good chance that they would spend 20 years in a federal institution. The individual in Scandinavia did not change their ways, because the law there does not recognize enforcement any intellectual property rights. > The (ab)user has full responsibility here. And what does one do when there is nothing that can be legally done to the abuser? Especially if their work is destroying all of the good will that the program has obtained. xan jonathon _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
