Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 06:13:57PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I wrote:
In some jurisdictions lending is an exclusive right of the copyright
owner.
Thomas Bushnell writes:
Can you be specific
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 06:13:57PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I wrote:
In some jurisdictions lending is an exclusive right of the copyright
owner.
Thomas Bushnell writes:
Can you be specific with references please?
(I am not a lawyer, but I play one on TV)
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 05:11:29PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thomas Bushnell writes:
Not quite correct. You are buing not just the right to read it; you are
also buying the physical copy, and you may do
Jon Dowland wrote:
On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 01:08:00PM +0200, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña
wrote:
Based on the text on the w.d.o frontpage it seems that Michael Ivey
has provided the tar.gz with all the w.d.n contents.
I would like to make a desperate plee that some attempt is made to
Humberto Massa Guimarães [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yes, you do need a license to the content of your books. Only thing is,
when you buy a book you are buying the right to read it. NOT the right
to copy it. NOT the right to modify it. NOT the right to redistribute
(modified or not) copies.
Thomas Bushnell writes:
Not quite correct. You are buing not just the right to read it; you are
also buying the physical copy, and you may do with it what you want: loan
it, rent it...
In some jurisdictions lending is an exclusive right of the copyright
owner.
--
John Hasler
--
To
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thomas Bushnell writes:
Not quite correct. You are buing not just the right to read it; you are
also buying the physical copy, and you may do with it what you want: loan
it, rent it...
In some jurisdictions lending is an exclusive right of the
I wrote:
In some jurisdictions lending is an exclusive right of the copyright
owner.
Thomas Bushnell writes:
Can you be specific with references please?
http://www.ifla.org/III/clm/p1/PublicLendingRight-Backgr.htm
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I wrote:
In some jurisdictions lending is an exclusive right of the copyright
owner.
Thomas Bushnell writes:
Can you be specific with references please?
http://www.ifla.org/III/clm/p1/PublicLendingRight-Backgr.htm
Well, one more anti-freedom law from
On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 01:08:00PM +0200, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña
wrote:
Based on the text on the w.d.o frontpage it seems that Michael Ivey
has provided the tar.gz with all the w.d.n contents.
I would like to make a desperate plee that some attempt is made to
incorporate a clear
Hi,
On Tuesday 06 September 2005 01:13, Jon Dowland wrote:
I would like to make a desperate plee that some attempt is made to
incorporate a clear indication of the licence under which material on
this wiki is available under, either with a user-readable prompt or
machine-readable metadata
[Jon Dowland]
I would like to make a desperate plee that some attempt is made to
incorporate a clear indication of the licence under which material on
this wiki is available under, either with a user-readable prompt or
machine-readable metadata (ideally both).
I might be slow, but can you
Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[Jon Dowland]
I would like to make a desperate plee that some attempt is made to
incorporate a clear indication of the licence under which material on
this wiki is available under, either with a user-readable prompt or
machine-readable metadata
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 10:58:59AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
I might be slow, but can you explain why we need a license for this?
I do not need to license my books, but I do need to license my
software. Why should the wiki documents be treated more like software
than a book?
your
I might be slow, but can you explain why we need a license for this?
I do not need to license my books, but I do need to license my
software. Why should the wiki documents be treated more like software
than a book?
Yes, you do need a license to the content of your books. Only thing is,
when
[Humberto Massa Guimarães]
Yes, you do need a license to the content of your books. Only thing is,
when you buy a book you are buying the right to read it. NOT the right
to copy it. NOT the right to modify it. NOT the right to redistribute
(modified or not) copies.
Actually, in Norway, I got
Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which I fail to understand, as the limited rights provided to me by
law should be sufficient for the wiki content in most cases.
I think it's fairly reasonable to think that anything[1] that appears in
debian.org should be shippable in main.
[1]
Actually, I stand partially corrected as of:
Actually, in Norway, I got a limited right to copy it, a given right
to modify it, a limited right to distribute it, and a limited right to
distribute copies.
Down here (Brasil) -- and I suspect in the USofA too -- NO (or, better
saying, extremely
* Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-09-06 17:39:06]:
Which I fail to understand, as the limited rights provided to me by
law should be sufficient for the wiki content in most cases.
i spoke to a german lawyer about this exact (license) issue when
skolelinux.de pondered an applicable
There needs to be a certain quality level reached, aparently, which is
not necessarily given in a wiki.
If only works of a certain quality level are protected by copyright why
aren't the products of the entertainment industry in the public domain?
I suspect that you misunderstood the lawyer.
[John Hasler]
I suspect that you misunderstood the lawyer.
We have the the same limitation in norwegian law, were the work need
to have (the norwegian expression) verkshøyde, which implies a
certain quality level as Andreas puts it. There are no limits on
copying and distribution of text below
Scripsit Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[John Hasler]
I suspect that you misunderstood the lawyer.
We have the the same limitation in norwegian law, were the work need
to have (the norwegian expression) verkshøyde, which implies a
certain quality level as Andreas puts it. There are
[Henning Makholm]
Unless the difference between Norwegian and Danish law is much
greater than I imagine, værkshøjde is not purely a matter of
quality.
You are right, of course. I just lacked the ability to express this
clearly in english. :)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Petter Reinholdtsen writes:
We have the the same limitation in norwegian law, were the work need to
have (the norwegian expression) verkshøyde, which implies a certain
quality level as Andreas puts it.
Do you mean quality or originality? Are you saying that if I write a
highly original stream
Hi, Andreas:
El Martes, 06 Septiembre 2005 18:20, Andreas Schuldei escribió:
* Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-09-06 17:39:06]:
Which I fail to understand, as the limited rights provided to me by
law should be sufficient for the wiki content in most cases.
i spoke to a german
Henning Makholm writes:
[værkshøjde] is more a question of the amount of expressive choice that
went into producing the text to make it fit under the law's concept of
an artistic or literary work. Even bad literature *is* literature and
so enjoys copyright protection.
That's pretty much the
John Hasler wrote:
Petter Reinholdtsen writes:
We have the the same limitation in norwegian law, were the work need to
have (the norwegian expression) verkshøyde, which implies a certain
quality level as Andreas puts it.
Do you mean quality or originality?
The amount of creativity the
Jesús M. Navarro wrote:
Hi, Andreas:
El Martes, 06 Septiembre 2005 18:20, Andreas Schuldei escribió:
* Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-09-06 17:39:06]:
Which I fail to understand, as the limited rights provided to me by
law should be sufficient for the wiki content in most
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
Computer programs are exempted from that requirement.
The work needs to have some kind of creative art. Trivial programs are also
not protected in a lot countries.
Gruss
Bernd
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe.
I wrote:
Do you mean quality or originality?
Thiemo Seufer writes:
The amount of creativity the author put in _successfully_.
Well, if he didn't successfully put it in then it isn't there, is it?
I wrote:
Are you saying that if I write a highly original stream of conciousness
novel that is
Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
Computer programs are exempted from that requirement.
The work needs to have some kind of creative art.
Without any quality judgement, correct. This doesn't leave anything
of interest out.
Trivial programs are also not
John Hasler wrote:
[snip]
Are you saying that if I write a highly original stream of conciousness
novel that is judged by the critics to be of abysmal literary quality
that I will be denied a copyright in Norway?
Thiemo Seufer writes:
If the average audience consistently says this is
32 matches
Mail list logo
