On Sun, Mar 25, 2012, at 01:36 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
I think this is a false assumption, the service itself required
creativity to implement, and the specific choice of word associations
in specific contexts is not algorithmic nor factual, but individual
calls by translation submitters who
Hi,
I've finished a package for Music21[0] but I need to solve one last license
issue. This software uses a scale database which is available under the
following condition:
The scale archive can be freely downloaded. See the contents listing for a
brief description of each scale file. The scales
On Sun, 25 Mar 2012, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
If I ask a random person on the street to translate a GPLed text
fragment, and the person give me a translated text fragment back, will
the resulting text fragment still be GPLed? Assuming the text
fragment was copyrightable in the first place, I
[Ken Arromdee]
The translator would be violating the GPL, but since this is fair use,
violating the GPL this way would be legal.
What is the translator doing in the example we are discussing that is
violating the GPL? Please explain more, as I failed to understand
what you mean from your terse
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 09:38:30AM -0400, Clark C. Evans wrote:
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012, at 01:36 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
I think this is a false assumption, the service itself required
creativity to implement, and the specific choice of word associations
in specific contexts is not
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012, at 09:53 AM, Steve Langasek wrote:
Not in the least. Releasing something under GPLv2+ means the
recipient gets to *choose* which version of the GPL they're
complying with, including when they create derivative works.
I've not studied GPLv2 at all, I was using GPLv3
On Mon, 26 Mar 2012, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
The translator would be violating the GPL, but since this is fair use,
violating the GPL this way would be legal.
What is the translator doing in the example we are discussing that is
violating the GPL? Please explain more, as I failed to
[Ken Arromdee]
The translator is creating a derivative work (his translation) and
distributing it. This is one of the rights of the copyright holder
and the GPL only gives him permission to do this if he puts his
derivative work under GPL. Since he did not put this derived work
under GPL,
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 02:00:24PM -0400, Clark C. Evans wrote:
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012, at 09:53 AM, Steve Langasek wrote:
In the GPLv3 only case, I think there's also still room to maneuver;
even though the translation is initially a mechanical translation, once
done, doesn't this
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 08:49:45AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
The most important argument is [...] the fact that that there
is no terms of service for http://freetranslation.mobi stating
otherwise, make me assume this service is following the law and
license of the texts it is given.
On Mon, 26 Mar 2012, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
I on the other hand believe that the translator here implicitly put
this derived work under GPL, because not doing it would be in
violation of the GPL. I believe assuming people follow the law and
the license is a better assumtion to make than to
On Mon, 26 Mar 2012, Mark Weyer wrote:
I do not think your argument is sound.
Assume I write a text, publish it under a license which basically says that
everyone translating it ows me EUR 1000, and then ask a random person on the
street to translate it (even without mentioning how it is
[Clark C. Evans]
It seems Petter is arguing that he might be able to work around
the copyright law by only translating a small piece at a time and
then assembling the translated pieces.
Since I didn't see any emphatic 'no' to this, and I somewhat recently
got this particular type of case
Felyza Wishbringer fel...@gmail.com writes:
Regarding Fair Use and international law, I'm in the dark, however I
am fairly certain that most Fair Use laws in sane localities would
take into account the sum of work, rather than chunk size.
Is that by definition – i.e. that, if a jurisdiction
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:01 PM, Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
[Ben Finney]
Is that by definition – i.e. that, if a jurisdiction does not behave
that way, you disqualify them from being a “sane jurisdiction”?
Or do you have a set of sane jurisdictions that isn't dependent on
Felyza Wishbringer fel...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:01 PM, Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au
wrote:
[Ben Finney]
Felyza Wishbringer wrote:
I am fairly certain that most Fair Use laws in sane localities
would take into account the sum of work, rather than chunk
16 matches
Mail list logo
