On 11/13/2012 11:40 AM, Andrew Thule wrote:
"A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications, which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a “derivative work” which is clearly the case here. This module contains annotations, elaborations, and other modifications and is clearly not the same as Oxford University Press' 39 volume published works "Discoveries in the Judean Desert" so automatically qualifies as derivative work by definition. However, people would rather argue than read law and case law.
I don't recall anyone suggesting that the problem was that your work was not derivative. No, just the opposite. There is a problem even if it is derivative. You can copy something or a portion of something without modifying it. That would be a non-derivative copy. Or, you can copy something, or a portion of something and modify it. That would be a derivative copy. Either way it is a copy as in copyright.
Works under copyright are protected from having derivative works made of them, unless it is a case covered by an exemption to copyright, such as fair use, but not all derivatives are fair use.
Jerry _______________________________________________ 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
