On 17 October 2011 10:54, <[email protected]> wrote: > > So how can a content creator allow content to be usable > > for free where there are no financial gains but restrict when someone > > is making financial gains ? > You cant, especially when the term "commercial" is totally ambiguous. > > What happens when an educational website/provider distributes the content > for > free, but merges several commercial ads into he content. what happens when > a > teacher uses the content in a classroom as - she is after all paid for the > lecture. >
As far as content is concerned, the Copyright Act gives considerable latitude for the use of even copyrighted material for, say, educational purposes. Chap XI (52) of the Act gives an indicative list of the fair use of copyright material, including "the reproduction of a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work by a teacher or a pupil in the course of instruction." (You can even stage a contemporary play or screen a film in a school without permission, as long as you don't sell tickets I suppose). Conflating 'content' with 'source-code' is rather disingenuous, and while the Copyright Act is not perfect, we have a reasonable understanding of what constitutes content. To suggest that content is, mostly, the source-code is to head rapidly down a slippery slope at the bottom of which one finds such chimera as basic smartphones that are reportedly governed by 4 million patents. I'm not sure if the nature of creativity is considered to be infinitely fragmentary and fungible in the digital world, but some of that thinking now permeates art and culture, as in recent cases where Bob Dylan<http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/bob-dylan-accused-of-painting-plagiarism-20110928>and Beyonce<http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/2011/oct/10/beyonce-dance-moves-new-video> were both accused of plagiarism. JTD is right in saying that "the argument for restricting "commercial" use is a strawman". There are any number of contexts (I really wouldn't say 'misuse') where even copyrighted content can legitimately be put to fair -- and profitable -- use as in, say, the use of film clippings, music videos or cricket highlights for telecast by TV news channels. Prevention of commercial use is, as JTD says, an unachievable goal. Sajan > > The argument for restricting "commercial" use is a strawman argument based > on > a very simplistic understanding of business models. This restriction is > open > to all sorts of misuse. Anyone intending to use such content should do so > with the utmost caution. Things are not as simple as made out to be. > > > > > regards > > Vivek > > > _______________________________________________ > network mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in >
_______________________________________________ network mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in
