Matěj I have no intention.. here's why:
The US definition of 'Fair Use': http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107 § 107 . Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106a, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, TEACHING (including multiple copies for classroom use), SCHOLARSHIP, or RESEARCH, is NOT an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include— (1) the purpose and character of the use, including WHETHER SUCH USE IS OF A COMMERCIAL NATURE OR IS FOR NONPROFIT EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES; Here's the Canadian definition of 'Fair Dealing' http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-42/index.html *29.* Fair dealing for the purpose of research or private study does not infringe copyright. *29.1* Fair dealing for the purpose of criticism or review does not infringe copyright if the following are mentioned: - (*a*) the source; and - (*b*) if given in the source, the name of the - (i) author, in the case of a work, In both cases it's clear this isn't a case where permission is needed. Moreover, with respect to 'Intellectual Property' both supreme courts in N. America (Canada and US) uphold the so-called 'scholars' convention' where once a text is published this implies consent on behalf of the author to allow further use of the text, and thus permission does not need to be obtained to use the text further, nor is there need to engage copyright. When Geza Vermes wrote "The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English" as a book (which was a commercial venture) he certainly didn't approach each scroll translator (some of whom were already dead) and obtain consent, and the translations that weren't his constituted the bulk of the book. The expectation that I need to individually approach each separate translators (separately) and obtain consent is unwarranted and unrealistic and not necessary according to the body of Copyright law I'm familiar with. If it's not this way in Europe, I can only express my gratitude I don't live in Europe. ~A On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 1:14 AM, Matěj Cepl <mc...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 22:56 -0500, Andrew Thule wrote: > > Clearly I have no commercial interest in offering this module to the list > > for QA. Clearly the translators who have offered their work to DJD did > so > > in an academic / research framework (making them available to the broader > > audience), and their translations are often reused and cited outside of > > DJD. I am not passing off their work untransformed or as my own. > > Then you shall certainly has no problem to get their express consent > with the publication of their work, right? > > Blessings, > > Matěj > > -- > http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/, Jabber: mcepl<at>ceplovi.cz > GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC > > See, when the GOVERNMENT spends money, it creates jobs; whereas > when the money is left in the hands of TAXPAYERS, God only knows > what they do with it. Bake it into pies, probably. Anything to > avoid creating jobs. > -- Dave Barry > > _______________________________________________ > 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 >
_______________________________________________ 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
