Yes agree .. except in the case where something being published a rote fact (facts cannot be copyrighted) .. and derivative works are their own case in copyright law. There's no dispute here.
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 9:37 AM Peter Von Kaehne <ref...@gmx.net> wrote: > This matter has been discussed ad nauseam on our mailing list several > years ago. Nothing has changed since. > > All written works including translations are copyrighted until the > copyright expires. > We need a permission by the copyright owner or the copyrioght owner > licenses the text freely. > If we do not have a permission, nor is there a free license available, we > will not publish the module. > > Nothing complicated there. There are edge cases (publication in Ethiopia > until recently or Iran until now being among them), this one is not one. > The translations are safely within all limits of copyright expiry for the > foreseeable future. So, if you want the module published, you need to go > and do the legwork. Speak with publishers and find agreement. Ask them to > write a letter to Troy or me that they agree with a module being made of > their text. Until then please cease debating the matter here and please > cease offering "test modules" on our list. > > > > *Gesendet:* Montag, 10. September 2018 um 14:15 Uhr > *Von:* "Andrew T." <thules...@gmail.com> > *An:* "SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum" <sword-devel@crosswire.org> > *Betreff:* Re: [sword-devel] Dead Sea Scrolls copyright discussion > I welcome honest discussion about it, I thirst for honest discussion > about it, more than I thirst for censorship at least. I have looked into > the copyright status of the DSS. What you say is partially correct. Each > separate manuscript’s translations (as found in Discoveries in Judean > Desert (DJD) or other sources) is held separately by DJD (or the other > sources) according to the copyright expressed in each of the publication > volumes. This copyright has been upheld by the Supreme Court of Israel. > > If you want details, here's a listing on a scroll by scroll basis: > https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/scrolls_deadsea/inventory/cave01.htm > > For example, the Genesis scroll and the Isaiah scroll: > *1Q1 (1QGen) 1QGenesis* *ß* > D. Barthélemy, *Discoveries in the Judaean Desert I* (DJD I) (Oxford > 1955), 49-50, pl. VIII. > > *1QIsa 1QIsaiaha **ß* > M. Burrows (ed.) with the assistance of J. C. Trever and W. H. Brownlee, *The > Dead Sea Scrolls of St. Mark's Monastery*, vol. I, pls. I-LIV. > > Now there are other translations of these scrolls, the above two are the > most common and most widely used. However, the textual content of the > scrolls themselves in Hebrew or paleo-Hebrew, being rote fact, is not > copyrightable. > https://www.newmediarights.org/business_models/artist/are_facts_copyrighted > > Facts such as the “Boston Celtics lost to the Toronto Raptors with a score > of 118-105” cannot be copyrighted, in Europe, N.America, or Russia. Chess > games, and their movements cannot be copyrighted (there are cases of > copyright disputes over the publishing of chess games that have established > this). The writing on the scrolls is factual, not the product of modern > scholarship. So the text itself can be published, by anyone, for any > reason. This is the publishing of fact. > > If there is to be discussion about copyright and the DSS the case of > publishing original language copies, There should be no concern. There are > publicly available copies of both manuscript images (can't use the images > themselves though, need to transcribe from the images) and there are > textual copies. > > From Peter's perspective, the issues surrounding the publication of the > DSS in translation, because it involves copyright needs to sorted out in a > way acceptable to this community. I agree. I would suggest taking exactly > the same approach as Martin G. Abegg Jr., Peter Flint, Eugene Ulrich in > their book 'The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible: The Oldest Known Bible Translated > for the First Time into English". This book is a derivative work, and > Abegg, Flint and Ulrich credit the translators and copyright holder's > explicitly. > > Therefore for this community's concern to be addressed, what's needed is > for Peter to understand on what basis Abegg, Flint, and Ulrich re-used the > copyrighted translations of others; what the constraints of publishing > derivative works are (possibly according to different jurisdictions); and > forge a way ahead, or not according to best judgement and community > discussion. > > As for me, so long as there is transparency in these discussions, respect, > due consideration and no bullying, of course Ill live within the standards > of the community. > > > On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 9:06 AM Andrew T. <thules...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Please, be patient and civil in this discussion, appreciating that >> copyright and biblical texts are both important and that controversy >> abounds when discussing both. Everyone's perspective is welcomed here: >> >> > _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
