Re: [DDN] Intellectual Property Rights
First of all, my compliments to Larry Phillips on a well thought out and well written response. For those wishing to delve deeply into these issues, there are two discussion groups (probably amongst many others) that I recommend for some detailed and excellent discussions in this subject field. Coalition for Networked Information CNI's Copyright Forum http://www.cni.org/forums/cni-copyright/cni-copyright.html LibLicense http://www.library.yale.edu/~llicense/index.shtml One might also, if interested, consider doing this Google search copyright protection and who benefits Web Results 1 - 10 of about 689 for copyright protection and who benefits Shortcut URL for the above search: http://snipurl.com/it0s Sample of Search Results: University of Pennsylvania : Research at Penn : Business :: Who ...Who Benefits by Extendi... ... Fifty years of copyright protection, shouldn't that be enough? From a purely incentive basis, it doesn't make sense to be ... http://www.upenn.edu/researchatpenn/article.php?280bus Copyright - Key QuestionsWho benefits from copyright law? Copyright law protects the person or groups of persons who ... Some materials have a special term of copyright protection. ... http://www.2learn.ca/copyright/questions.html COPYRIGHT CORNER NOVEMBER The opposite of copyright protection is the public domain. ... It is difficult to determine who benefits from this provision or who was lobbying for the ... http://www.unc.edu/~unclng/copy-corner5.htm CBBC Newsround | Teachers | Citizenship 11 14 | Subject areas ...Who benefits from copying ideas? Prompt: In the short term, people can make ... of books where an official copy of each was kept for copyright protection. ... http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/ newsid_399/newsid_3996800/3996817.stm link to OCDSB homepage Welcome to OCDSB Student Resources HomeWHO BENEFITS FROM COPYRIGHT LAW? Copyright law protects the person or groups of persons who ... Some materials have a special term of copyright protection. ... http://www.ocdsb.edu.on.ca/Student_Res/search/crquest.htm AWID - Copyright expansion: Undermining the public...COPYRIGHT WHO BENEFITS? The development of the Internet and digital technology has enabled ... With expanded copyright protection occurring in the North, ... http://www.awid.org/go.php?stid=1489 General information about patentsIn particular, the inventor who benefits from having filed a PCT application ... Copyright protection is available without your even having to ask for it, ... http://www.patents.com/patents.htm - 101k - Oct 19, 2005 Sincerely, David Dillard Temple University (215) 204 - 4584 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/net-gold http://www.edu-cyberpg.com/ringleaders/davidd.html http://www.kovacs.com/medref-l/medref-l.html http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/net-gold.html http://www.LIFEofFlorida.org Digital Divide Network http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/jwne == On Thu, 13 Oct 2005, Larry Phillips wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone else think it is unethical (as well as illegal) to digitize works that are protected by copyright? Don't the writers and producers of intellectual and artistic property own their works and have the right to control how they are distributed To get technical, the complainants are book publishers who purchased First book rights or something similar. They have been compensated. Electronic distribution is a right they haven't purchased or have an interest in. As I point out later, this argument isn't about compensating authors. . . . Do we have on this list any authors in the group who depend for their livings (or a part thereof) on the royalties they receive from books, music, film, etc.? And will they continue to publish such works if they can't receive a fair recompense for them? In this day and age, copyright isn't used to benefit the creators of intellectual property. It is used to benefit the copyright owner, i.e. Harcourt Brace specifically or more generally the media conglomerates who have bought the copyrights wholesale. The media conglomerates haven't been satisfied with historical protections and have successfully lobbied to extend the length of copyright protection long after the death of the author. In addition, they bully users by using the threat of legal action to extend copyright beyond what is intended. Further, recognizing changes in technology, the media conglomerates are requiring authors to relinquish more rights (the favoured term is all rights) in exchange for publication. In Canada, the media lobbies successfully portrayed all purchasers of recordable media as thieves who madly copy everything they can lay their hands on. Consequently, Canadians pay a royalty with every recordable media purchase. This being the case one would suspect copying music etc. would be legal -- the royalties are paid. However, Canadians are still
RE: Re: [DDN] Intellectual Property Rights
Need to remember that academic publishers generally do very limited print runs and hence the price of their books will be high. We need to remember that just because it is in digital format doesn't mean that copyright may be violated. Especially now that information is often someone's livelihood. The propensity of people to copy and paste and disseminate information freely electronically also dissipates the authority of the information - who actually wrote it and is it correct, have authority? Copyright and authority add value to information products - why we need to ensure that this concept does not die just because the information is in electronic format rather than print. :) BC Convenor for the Transforming Information and Learning Conference http://www.chs.ecu.edu.au/TILC Barbara Combes, Lecturer School of Computer and Information Science Edith Cowan University, Perth Western Australia Ph: (08) 9370 6072 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Whatever the cost of our libraries, the price is cheap compared to that of an ignorant nation. Walter Cronkite This email is confidential and intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify me immediately by return email or telephone and destroy the original message. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 14 October 2005 4:28 AM To: The Digital Divide Network discussiongroup; The Digital Divide Network discussiongroup Subject: Re: Re: [DDN] Intellectual Property Rights I agree with you on almost everything you say, Claude. The exception is the possible suggestion -- I'm not sure you mean to say this -- that because print piracy has such a long history, we should be grateful that digital piracy is less threatening Just the fact that Yahoo and Google announce that they are going to scan all the books in some eminent libraries, and don't explain (as you did) that only public-domain material can be legally digitized, does seem to give tacit permission for scanning of anything and everything. And the academic publishers have certainly been asking for trouble for a long, long time, by pricing their books and journals at a level that only research libraries can actually buy them. And yes, there are supposed legal protections in some of the worst piracy countries, and they work a bit better now than they did 20 years ago. I served as President and CEO of Harcourt Brace for several years and had the honor of being bodily thrown out of a bookstore in Taiwan because a colleague and I were trying to buy pirated versions of Academic Press titles so that we could file legal objections Nonetheless: my point is that many people have no idea that the right to copy something multiple times does not become yours when you buy a book or CD or DVD. We need to encourage people, I think, to consider the economic and intellectual consequences of this ignorance. Sarah Blackmun From: Claude Almansi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/10/13 Thu PM 03:22:03 EDT To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [DDN] Intellectual Property Rights Sarah Blackmun wrote: Does anyone else think it is unethical (as well as illegal) to digitize works that are protected by copyright? It can be unethical and illegal in some cases, but Taran Rampersad, whom you seem to be answering was only speaking using Optical Character Recognition with texts photographed in the library. - If the digitalized copy is for your personal use and study, it is legal. - If the work copied is in the public domain, it is even legal to distribute it or put it online. - What would be illegal would be to distribute and/or put online a work protected by copyright Don't the writers and producers of intellectual and artistic property own their works and have the right to control how they are distributed? Yes, but copyright laws allow readers to make a personal copy for studying purposes. And a text version is far more handy for studying than a PDF. Not to mention that blind people will anyway have to translate PDFs or image formats into text, by using OCR. (Don't Google and Yahoo and the university libraries know this? Of course they do!) Not exactly: the Google project was halted precisely because of the copyright issue. The Très Grande Bibliothèque Nationale of France so far has only scanned and put on line PDFs, which seem locked - and the ones I have seen are all in the public domain. I have not seen the Yahoo ones Do we have on this list any authors in the group who depend for their livings (or a part thereof) on the royalties they receive from books, music, film, etc
Re: [DDN] Intellectual Property Rights
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone else think it is unethical (as well as illegal) to digitize works that are protected by copyright? Don't the writers and producers of intellectual and artistic property own their works and have the right to control how they are distributed To get technical, the complainants are book publishers who purchased First book rights or something similar. They have been compensated. Electronic distribution is a right they haven't purchased or have an interest in. As I point out later, this argument isn't about compensating authors. . . . Do we have on this list any authors in the group who depend for their livings (or a part thereof) on the royalties they receive from books, music, film, etc.? And will they continue to publish such works if they can't receive a fair recompense for them? In this day and age, copyright isn't used to benefit the creators of intellectual property. It is used to benefit the copyright owner, i.e. Harcourt Brace specifically or more generally the media conglomerates who have bought the copyrights wholesale. The media conglomerates haven't been satisfied with historical protections and have successfully lobbied to extend the length of copyright protection long after the death of the author. In addition, they bully users by using the threat of legal action to extend copyright beyond what is intended. Further, recognizing changes in technology, the media conglomerates are requiring authors to relinquish more rights (the favoured term is all rights) in exchange for publication. In Canada, the media lobbies successfully portrayed all purchasers of recordable media as thieves who madly copy everything they can lay their hands on. Consequently, Canadians pay a royalty with every recordable media purchase. This being the case one would suspect copying music etc. would be legal -- the royalties are paid. However, Canadians are still being accused of pirating. It's off topic but one of my pet peeves is own the video. False and misleading advertising every time you see it. You license the video. What will be the long-term impact on intellectual and artistic production if everything is in the public domain as soon as it is published? I expect most creators of intellectual property never see any royalties. For example, one condition of recieving a Masters degree was granting the National Library of Canada a non exclusive license to copy my thesis. The National Library of Canada assigned the license to 3M. Personnel y, I really don't see how this can be legal, but my legal team can't compete with the Government of Canada and 3M. In short, copyright may benefit someone -- it isn't the creator. Sarah Blackmun Former Senior Vice President Harcourt Brace Publishing Group -- Larry Phillips FutureCraft http://www.clubwebcanada.ca/l-pphillips/ Quantum 2000: Education for Today and Tomorrow http://www.clubwebcanada.ca/l-pphillips/quantum Finding a Way http://findingaway.blogspot.com/ Alberta Consumers' Association http://albertaconsumers.org Conversations about education Ed Conversation mailing list http://www.topica.com/lists/edconversation/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Intellectual Property Rights
Sarah, thank you for your answer: I agree that former non-digital piracy does not justify digital piracy. What I had written was just aimed at not demonizing too much the piracy potential of digital tools, but it is true that it must be addressed. Same with plagiarism, btw: people have probably plagiarized for various purposes (academic career, passing exams, making money) ever since they started to write (though the notion of plagiarism is irrelevant for the time preceding the rise of the concept of authorship, when centone was an accepted practice, for instance). This doesn't mean that digital plagiarism should be ignored, but it does mean that some of the present catastrophe writing and attitude about it in academic circles is probably not the best way to tackle the issue either. Re your answer to Sharon: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sharon, I think you're exactly right. Books and journals sold in digital, downloadable form could be priced without the cost of paper, printing, binding, and distribution, and probably with a smaller discount to the retailer. And authors could get royalties, and publishers could receive a reasonable return on their investment. One of the big forces working against this is the academic tenure system, which at most institutions recognizes only printed books and journal articles as part of one's bibliography when applying for tenure. It would take a widespread change in academe as well as publishers to enable meaningful movement toward digitized original works. One interesting solution is online publishers, who offer the possibility to either download a text in digitized form, or to order it on paper. A few months ago, David Warlick mentioned - I can't remember if here or if on the WWWEDU mailing-list or both - http://www.lulu.com/, who do that. They print and bind on demand only, thus cutting the storage costs. Authors set the price, on the basis of an equation comprising fixed costs (price per page + binding), what they want to earn per copy, plus a 20% commission for the publisher - to which postage gets added (see http://www.lulu.com/help/node/view/33 , then Step 5: Price Finish) But when I mentioned this possibility to some friends in academe, they objected that for career purposes, the peer-reviewing would be lacking, whereas it is vital for career purposes. On the other hand, though, Lulu allows authors to buy their books at a discounted price (without the author's commission) and postage can be reduced for bulk shipping. This would enable academics to order copies at a more reasonable price, and send them for peer-reviewing, perhaps. cheers Claude -- Claude Almansi Castione, Switzerland claude.almansi_at_bluewin.ch http://www.adisi.ch - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADISI http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/Claude http://www.digitaldivide.net/blog/claude http://www.digitaldivide.net/community/languages ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
[DDN] Intellectual Property Rights
I agree with John that the Google's and Yahoo's digitization of books is not a problem if the purpose is to provide access to specific portions only - the creation of the intellectual showroom (look what happened when the Border brothers encouraged people in their Ann Arbor bookstore to actually sit and read part of the book before they bought it). In fact, digitizing the entire book is the only way to make this search process work - and the access would be permitted under the fair use provisions of copyright. The technology is certainly there to limit access to just the searched portions. But, if access is provided to the entire book, then a copyright issue comes up - which brings me back to my earlier posting about Yahoo's plan to tie its Internet Archive to a Bookmobile that would allow for on-demand printing of a book, purportedly in underdeveloped areas. Such an on-demand printing activity without paying royalties would be a problem (as Kinko's found out a number of years ago when they put together on-demand university course packs from copyrighted materials). The core of this debate, however, is what belongs in the public domain. My real concern is the absurdly long term for copyrights that keeps materials out of the public domain - and goes well beyond any incentive to the authors. That is why I applauded the release of the Adelphi Charter on Creativity, Innovation and Intellectual Property. Kenan Patrick Jarboe, Ph.D. Athena Alliance 911 East Capitol Street, SE Washington, DC 20003-3903 (202) 547-7064 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.AthenaAlliance.org http://www.IntangibleEconomy.org ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
[DDN] Intellectual Property Rights
Does anyone else think it is unethical (as well as illegal) to digitize works that are protected by copyright? Don't the writers and producers of intellectual and artistic property own their works and have the right to control how they are distributed? (Don't Google and Yahoo and the university libraries know this? Of course they do!) Do we have on this list any authors in the group who depend for their livings (or a part thereof) on the royalties they receive from books, music, film, etc.? And will they continue to publish such works if they can't receive a fair recompense for them? What will be the long-term impact on intellectual and artistic production if everything is in the public domain as soon as it is published? Sarah Blackmun Former Senior Vice President Harcourt Brace Publishing Group From: Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/10/12 Wed PM 05:51:26 EDT To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [DDN] Creating the $100 Laptop Actually, by doing some research on the darker side of the internet, I've found some people who scan/photograph books, use optical character recognition, and create eBooks. Apparently, there's a big underground following. Some of the server statistics show over 100,000 downloads of some books. But those folks are always shifting, and would be hard to find... David P. Dillard wrote: Scanning of books with a camera has been going on in libraries since the advent of digital cameras and to a limited degree with regular cameras before the advent of the digital camera. The drawback before the digital camera was the cost and difficulty of processing film. Now with digital cameras it is probably a widespread practice. Sincerely, David Dillard Temple University (215) 204 - 4584 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/net-gold http://www.edu-cyberpg.com/ringleaders/davidd.html http://www.kovacs.com/medref-l/medref-l.html http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/net-gold.html http://www.LIFEofFlorida.org Digital Divide Network http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/jwne On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, Taran Rampersad wrote: You know, it's a matter of time before digital cells with cameras (or just plain cameras) are used to copy books out of libraries. Would that be a bad thing? :-) David P. Dillard wrote: Cell phones are not just getting attention on campuses in general as per your statement, but they have also been a major concern in libraries in particular. -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: San Fernando, Trinidad [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/Taran Coming on January 1st, 2006: http://www.OpenDepth.com Criticize by creating. ? Michelangelo DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: San Fernando, Trinidad [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/Taran Coming on January 1st, 2006: http://www.OpenDepth.com Criticize by creating. ? Michelangelo ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. Move To: (Choose Folder) Inbox Trash Drafts Back to: SentMail Help ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] Intellectual Property Rights
I do believe that writers and artist should control how they work is distributed - but as we look forward, maybe all these works need to be digitized and the writers and artist get royalties from the digitized copies. Soon, no one will want to buy or store all the books they read or use for research. They will want digitized copies to have has a reference. Let's learn from I Pods - we still buy the music but not the record (am I telling my age - I should have said CD). We already pay for copies of reports and works of art to share with our students who may never get to the Louvre. This could be a win win. This is already starting in the movie industry too. Let wake up the educational systems and start viewing other ways of get information out then just books. Sharon Valear Robinson, Ed.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 8:43 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [DDN] Intellectual Property Rights Does anyone else think it is unethical (as well as illegal) to digitize works that are protected by copyright? Don't the writers and producers of intellectual and artistic property own their works and have the right to control how they are distributed? (Don't Google and Yahoo and the university libraries know this? Of course they do!) Do we have on this list any authors in the group who depend for their livings (or a part thereof) on the royalties they receive from books, music, film, etc.? And will they continue to publish such works if they can't receive a fair recompense for them? What will be the long-term impact on intellectual and artistic production if everything is in the public domain as soon as it is published? Sarah Blackmun Former Senior Vice President Harcourt Brace Publishing Group From: Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/10/12 Wed PM 05:51:26 EDT To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [DDN] Creating the $100 Laptop Actually, by doing some research on the darker side of the internet, I've found some people who scan/photograph books, use optical character recognition, and create eBooks. Apparently, there's a big underground following. Some of the server statistics show over 100,000 downloads of some books. But those folks are always shifting, and would be hard to find... David P. Dillard wrote: Scanning of books with a camera has been going on in libraries since the advent of digital cameras and to a limited degree with regular cameras before the advent of the digital camera. The drawback before the digital camera was the cost and difficulty of processing film. Now with digital cameras it is probably a widespread practice. Sincerely, David Dillard Temple University (215) 204 - 4584 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/net-gold http://www.edu-cyberpg.com/ringleaders/davidd.html http://www.kovacs.com/medref-l/medref-l.html http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/net-gold.html http://www.LIFEofFlorida.org Digital Divide Network http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/jwne On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, Taran Rampersad wrote: You know, it's a matter of time before digital cells with cameras (or just plain cameras) are used to copy books out of libraries. Would that be a bad thing? :-) David P. Dillard wrote: Cell phones are not just getting attention on campuses in general as per your statement, but they have also been a major concern in libraries in particular. -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: San Fernando, Trinidad [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/Taran Coming on January 1st, 2006: http://www.OpenDepth.com Criticize by creating. ? Michelangelo DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: San Fernando, Trinidad [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/Taran Coming on January 1st, 2006: http://www.OpenDepth.com Criticize by creating. ? Michelangelo ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. Move To: (Choose Folder) Inbox Trash Drafts Back
RE: [DDN] Intellectual Property Rights
Some of my colleagues at the Berkman Center are working on something called the Digital Media Project which tackles precisely these questions. Their contact details and more info about the project, plus a report, is here: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/media/wp2005 Rebecca - Rebecca MacKinnon Research Fellow, Berkman Ctr. for Internet Society www.GlobalVoicesOnline.org The world is talking. Are you listening? Weblog: www.RConversation.com email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] hushmail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:digitaldivide- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 11:43 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [DDN] Intellectual Property Rights Does anyone else think it is unethical (as well as illegal) to digitize works that are protected by copyright? Don't the writers and producers of intellectual and artistic property own their works and have the right to control how they are distributed? (Don't Google and Yahoo and the university libraries know this? Of course they do!) Do we have on this list any authors in the group who depend for their livings (or a part thereof) on the royalties they receive from books, music, film, etc.? And will they continue to publish such works if they can't receive a fair recompense for them? What will be the long-term impact on intellectual and artistic production if everything is in the public domain as soon as it is published? Sarah Blackmun Former Senior Vice President Harcourt Brace Publishing Group From: Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/10/12 Wed PM 05:51:26 EDT To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [DDN] Creating the $100 Laptop Actually, by doing some research on the darker side of the internet, I've found some people who scan/photograph books, use optical character recognition, and create eBooks. Apparently, there's a big underground following. Some of the server statistics show over 100,000 downloads of some books. But those folks are always shifting, and would be hard to find... David P. Dillard wrote: Scanning of books with a camera has been going on in libraries since the advent of digital cameras and to a limited degree with regular cameras before the advent of the digital camera. The drawback before the digital camera was the cost and difficulty of processing film. Now with digital cameras it is probably a widespread practice. Sincerely, David Dillard Temple University (215) 204 - 4584 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/net-gold http://www.edu-cyberpg.com/ringleaders/davidd.html http://www.kovacs.com/medref-l/medref-l.html http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/net-gold.html http://www.LIFEofFlorida.org Digital Divide Network http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/jwne On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, Taran Rampersad wrote: You know, it's a matter of time before digital cells with cameras (or just plain cameras) are used to copy books out of libraries. Would that be a bad thing? :-) David P. Dillard wrote: Cell phones are not just getting attention on campuses in general as per your statement, but they have also been a major concern in libraries in particular. -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: San Fernando, Trinidad [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/Taran Coming on January 1st, 2006: http://www.OpenDepth.com Criticize by creating. ? Michelangelo DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: San Fernando, Trinidad [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/Taran Coming on January 1st, 2006: http://www.OpenDepth.com Criticize by creating. ? Michelangelo ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. Move To: (Choose Folder) Inbox Trash Drafts Back to: SentMail Help ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message
Re: [DDN] Intellectual Property Rights
Sarah Blackmun wrote: Does anyone else think it is unethical (as well as illegal) to digitize works that are protected by copyright? It can be unethical and illegal in some cases, but Taran Rampersad, whom you seem to be answering was only speaking using Optical Character Recognition with texts photographed in the library. - If the digitalized copy is for your personal use and study, it is legal. - If the work copied is in the public domain, it is even legal to distribute it or put it online. - What would be illegal would be to distribute and/or put online a work protected by copyright Don't the writers and producers of intellectual and artistic property own their works and have the right to control how they are distributed? Yes, but copyright laws allow readers to make a personal copy for studying purposes. And a text version is far more handy for studying than a PDF. Not to mention that blind people will anyway have to translate PDFs or image formats into text, by using OCR. (Don't Google and Yahoo and the university libraries know this? Of course they do!) Not exactly: the Google project was halted precisely because of the copyright issue. The Très Grande Bibliothèque Nationale of France so far has only scanned and put on line PDFs, which seem locked - and the ones I have seen are all in the public domain. I have not seen the Yahoo ones Do we have on this list any authors in the group who depend for their livings (or a part thereof) on the royalties they receive from books, music, film, etc.? And will they continue to publish such works if they can't receive a fair recompense for them? I do - to a small extent, granted: royalties on 2 anthologies I co-edited in the 80's. The rest of my writings don't produce royalties: I was/am paid a lump sum for translations, most editing jobs and prefaces. So I don't care a hoot if folks digitize these texts. Actually, I have done so myself, and banged them online, when the publishers remaindered the paper editions. Ever since Creative Commons licenses appeared, I have put what I write online under a CC license: by NC (non commercial) - at times also SA (share alike), when I felt like p...ing off some likely plagiarists. On the whole, it has worked fine: got far more paid translations to do since then. What will be the long-term impact on intellectual and artistic production if everything is in the public domain as soon as it is published? Mistaken assumption. There were pirate editions before digital age: ask Oxford University Press or any academic press whose books got merrily pirated and sold at 1/4 of the price in some countries; ask authors old enough to remember being translated and published without authorization or royalties in USSR. Well, USSR relented in the end and did give royalties: in rubles, and it was forbidden to export them. So the writers would go to USSR and have a luxury holyday on their royalties, buy some furs (though for the better ones, you needed to pay in dollars). So yes, there are digital pirates. But if anything, making pirate editions on the scale that was practiced with paper editions in USSR and other countries is more difficult in the digital age, because if they get offered online, it's easier to nab the pirates. BTW the above obtains for music and videos too, up to a point: there was already a thriving pirate industry for cassette and videotapes in Italy before the digital age, for instance. The problem with music and videos is that big producers like RIAA are now digitally protecting there works, which means that non-tech-minded users can't make a legitimate personal copy for their own use, while tech-minded folks wishing to break the law override the protections without problems. cheers Claude -- Claude Almansi Castione, Switzerland claude.almansi_at_bluewin.ch http://www.adisi.ch http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/Claude http://www.digitaldivide.net/blog/claude http://www.digitaldivide.net/community/languages NB La mia messaggeria di posta elettronica è impostata per rifiutare e-mail di più di 200kb. Per favore, se *dovete* condividere un file pesante, mettetelo online e mandatemi l'URL (si può fare con http://www.rapidshare.de ad es). NB My e-mail client is set on accepting only e-mails under 200kb. If you *have to* share a big file, please put it online and send me the URL (you can do that at http://www.rapidshare.de , for instance). ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: RE: [DDN] Intellectual Property Rights
Sharon, I think you're exactly right. Books and journals sold in digital, downloadable form could be priced without the cost of paper, printing, binding, and distribution, and probably with a smaller discount to the retailer. And authors could get royalties, and publishers could receive a reasonable return on their investment. One of the big forces working against this is the academic tenure system, which at most institutions recognizes only printed books and journal articles as part of one's bibliography when applying for tenure. It would take a widespread change in academe as well as publishers to enable meaningful movement toward digitized original works. Sarah Blackmun From: Sharon V Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/10/13 Thu PM 12:58:47 EDT To: 'The Digital Divide Network discussion group' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [DDN] Intellectual Property Rights I do believe that writers and artist should control how they work is distributed - but as we look forward, maybe all these works need to be digitized and the writers and artist get royalties from the digitized copies. Soon, no one will want to buy or store all the books they read or use for research. They will want digitized copies to have has a reference. Let's learn from I Pods - we still buy the music but not the record (am I telling my age - I should have said CD). We already pay for copies of reports and works of art to share with our students who may never get to the Louvre. This could be a win win. This is already starting in the movie industry too. Let wake up the educational systems and start viewing other ways of get information out then just books. Sharon Valear Robinson, Ed.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 8:43 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [DDN] Intellectual Property Rights Does anyone else think it is unethical (as well as illegal) to digitize works that are protected by copyright? Don't the writers and producers of intellectual and artistic property own their works and have the right to control how they are distributed? (Don't Google and Yahoo and the university libraries know this? Of course they do!) Do we have on this list any authors in the group who depend for their livings (or a part thereof) on the royalties they receive from books, music, film, etc.? And will they continue to publish such works if they can't receive a fair recompense for them? What will be the long-term impact on intellectual and artistic production if everything is in the public domain as soon as it is published? Sarah Blackmun Former Senior Vice President Harcourt Brace Publishing Group From: Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/10/12 Wed PM 05:51:26 EDT To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [DDN] Creating the $100 Laptop Actually, by doing some research on the darker side of the internet, I've found some people who scan/photograph books, use optical character recognition, and create eBooks. Apparently, there's a big underground following. Some of the server statistics show over 100,000 downloads of some books. But those folks are always shifting, and would be hard to find... David P. Dillard wrote: Scanning of books with a camera has been going on in libraries since the advent of digital cameras and to a limited degree with regular cameras before the advent of the digital camera. The drawback before the digital camera was the cost and difficulty of processing film. Now with digital cameras it is probably a widespread practice. Sincerely, David Dillard Temple University (215) 204 - 4584 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/net-gold http://www.edu-cyberpg.com/ringleaders/davidd.html http://www.kovacs.com/medref-l/medref-l.html http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/net-gold.html http://www.LIFEofFlorida.org Digital Divide Network http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/jwne On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, Taran Rampersad wrote: You know, it's a matter of time before digital cells with cameras (or just plain cameras) are used to copy books out of libraries. Would that be a bad thing? :-) David P. Dillard wrote: Cell phones are not just getting attention on campuses in general as per your statement, but they have also been a major concern in libraries in particular. -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: San Fernando, Trinidad [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/Taran Coming on January 1st, 2006: http://www.OpenDepth.com Criticize by creating. ? Michelangelo DIGITALDIVIDE
Re: [DDN] Intellectual Property Rights
It is neither unethical or illegal to digitize (i.e. copy) books that are protected by copyright, if done right. It has been done for over 100 years in the analog world. Example: Copyright owner authorizes printer to make 50 copies. Printer makes 65, gives 50 back to author, gets paid for making 50. What happened to the other 15? They were various page proofs, masters, misfed pages, ink tests, etc that were needed to produce the 50 quality copies. Without them, the copyright owner would have gotten 35 good copies and 15 inferior ones. Here, the Google model is a terrific benefit for authors: Instead of me, a prospective buyer, searching for the next book purely on the basis of third party catalogs and descriptions, I can connect directly with the work itself, searching for which books contain the precise words or phrases I am looking for. Authors would be thrilled. That book that has run its course as far as the publishers' model is concerned may get new life -- increased demand, pressure for the publisher to either reprint or release rights back to the author to do so. The only people hurt by this are publishers who have retired a book and don't want to see demand for out-of-print books to drive sales of used books (even as those give greater exposure to the author), and divert reading time and buying dollars from the next new release they are promoting. For authors, for the public, and for the public policy behind copyright protection, it is a huge win. Ms. Blackmun seems to be reacting to the misconception that Google is somehow placing these books in the public domain. That is not the case at all. Google is doing the equivalent of having the showroom floor for every bookstore in the world. A showroom where people can only peruse a book long enough to determine whether it is the one they want to buy -- and not long enough for the perusal to substitute for the copy. Imagine it like an extremely knowledgeable librarian, of whom you can inquire: Can you direct me to any books that talk about global warming and also mention ice age, Chile and Argentina ? The librarian jots down several, and also tells you the context in which those terms appear so you can omit the book that talked about how there was a global warming to the Tango of Argentina, with the exception of Chile, which considered it part of the ice age, and focus instead on the ones that dealt with the impact of global warming in Patagonia and its possible relationship to past and future ice ages. In sum, more authors' works get found, greater demand for their works is sure to follow, the public becomes better informed, an the purposes of copyright are served. John _ John T. Mitchell Interaction Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://interactionlaw.com On 10/13/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone else think it is unethical (as well as illegal) to digitize works that are protected by copyright? Don't the writers and producers of intellectual and artistic property own their works and have the right to control how they are distributed? (Don't Google and Yahoo and the university libraries know this? Of course they do!) Do we have on this list any authors in the group who depend for their livings (or a part thereof) on the royalties they receive from books, music, film, etc.? And will they continue to publish such works if they can't receive a fair recompense for them? What will be the long-term impact on intellectual and artistic production if everything is in the public domain as soon as it is published? Sarah Blackmun Former Senior Vice President Harcourt Brace Publishing Group From: Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/10/12 Wed PM 05:51:26 EDT To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [DDN] Creating the $100 Laptop Actually, by doing some research on the darker side of the internet, I've found some people who scan/photograph books, use optical character recognition, and create eBooks. Apparently, there's a big underground following. Some of the server statistics show over 100,000 downloads of some books. But those folks are always shifting, and would be hard to find... David P. Dillard wrote: Scanning of books with a camera has been going on in libraries since the advent of digital cameras and to a limited degree with regular cameras before the advent of the digital camera. The drawback before the digital camera was the cost and difficulty of processing film. Now with digital cameras it is probably a widespread practice. Sincerely, David Dillard Temple University (215) 204 - 4584 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/net-gold http://www.edu-cyberpg.com/ringleaders/davidd.html http://www.kovacs.com/medref-l/medref-l.html http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/net-gold.html http://www.LIFEofFlorida.org Digital Divide Network
Re: [DDN] Intellectual Property Rights
On 10/13/05, Sharon V Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I do believe that writers and artist should control how they work is distributed - . . . . Congress appears to disagree. Back in 1909, when it was codifying what has come to be known as the first sale doctrine, the Judiciary Committee (then known as the House Committee on Patents) declared that it would be most unwise for the copyright proprietor to exercise any control whatever over the article which is the subject of copyright after said proprietor has made the first sale. H.R. Report No. , 60th Cong., 2nd Sess. (1909). Section 109(a) of the current Copyright Act does not even require a sale: The owner of any lawfully made copy is free to distribute it without the consent of the copyright owner (with minor exceptions for sound recording rental and rental of certain types of computer programs). Just to be clear, distribution in this case means distribution of the tangible medium. So-called p2p distribution or electronic distribution is in reality reproduction under the Copyright Act. That is, the exclusive right of distribution (which generally does not apply to lawfully made copies owned by others) applies only to copies and phonorecords, which are in turn defined to be works on a tangible medium of expression. But lack of a right to control distribution of copies they do not own is terrific, as it ensures that those far segments of the population least likely to be seen as profit sources by the copyright owner will have access to valuable copyrighted works. Millions of people obtain their copies through perfectly legitimate secondary markets -- second-hand stores, yard sales, library borrowing, video store rental, gift, lending, and literally even the garbage dump. And millions of these people are either unwilling or unable to acquire the work on the terms the copyright owner would prefer. Thus, this lack of control assures healthy secondary markets for the works. Plus, it adds value for he original purchaser: Consider this: If you are prepared to spend $25,000 for the new car of your dreams, how would you react if the manufacturer required that you obtain its consent before selling it used? You certainly would no longer see it as a $25,000 value. John ___ John T. Mitchell Interaction Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://interactionlaw.com ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: Re: [DDN] Intellectual Property Rights
I agree with you on almost everything you say, Claude. The exception is the possible suggestion -- I'm not sure you mean to say this -- that because print piracy has such a long history, we should be grateful that digital piracy is less threatening Just the fact that Yahoo and Google announce that they are going to scan all the books in some eminent libraries, and don't explain (as you did) that only public-domain material can be legally digitized, does seem to give tacit permission for scanning of anything and everything. And the academic publishers have certainly been asking for trouble for a long, long time, by pricing their books and journals at a level that only research libraries can actually buy them. And yes, there are supposed legal protections in some of the worst piracy countries, and they work a bit better now than they did 20 years ago. I served as President and CEO of Harcourt Brace for several years and had the honor of being bodily thrown out of a bookstore in Taiwan because a colleague and I were trying to buy pirated versions of Academic Press titles so that we could file legal objections Nonetheless: my point is that many people have no idea that the right to copy something multiple times does not become yours when you buy a book or CD or DVD. We need to encourage people, I think, to consider the economic and intellectual consequences of this ignorance. Sarah Blackmun From: Claude Almansi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/10/13 Thu PM 03:22:03 EDT To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [DDN] Intellectual Property Rights Sarah Blackmun wrote: Does anyone else think it is unethical (as well as illegal) to digitize works that are protected by copyright? It can be unethical and illegal in some cases, but Taran Rampersad, whom you seem to be answering was only speaking using Optical Character Recognition with texts photographed in the library. - If the digitalized copy is for your personal use and study, it is legal. - If the work copied is in the public domain, it is even legal to distribute it or put it online. - What would be illegal would be to distribute and/or put online a work protected by copyright Don't the writers and producers of intellectual and artistic property own their works and have the right to control how they are distributed? Yes, but copyright laws allow readers to make a personal copy for studying purposes. And a text version is far more handy for studying than a PDF. Not to mention that blind people will anyway have to translate PDFs or image formats into text, by using OCR. (Don't Google and Yahoo and the university libraries know this? Of course they do!) Not exactly: the Google project was halted precisely because of the copyright issue. The Très Grande Bibliothèque Nationale of France so far has only scanned and put on line PDFs, which seem locked - and the ones I have seen are all in the public domain. I have not seen the Yahoo ones Do we have on this list any authors in the group who depend for their livings (or a part thereof) on the royalties they receive from books, music, film, etc.? And will they continue to publish such works if they can't receive a fair recompense for them? I do - to a small extent, granted: royalties on 2 anthologies I co-edited in the 80's. The rest of my writings don't produce royalties: I was/am paid a lump sum for translations, most editing jobs and prefaces. So I don't care a hoot if folks digitize these texts. Actually, I have done so myself, and banged them online, when the publishers remaindered the paper editions. Ever since Creative Commons licenses appeared, I have put what I write online under a CC license: by NC (non commercial) - at times also SA (share alike), when I felt like p...ing off some likely plagiarists. On the whole, it has worked fine: got far more paid translations to do since then. What will be the long-term impact on intellectual and artistic production if everything is in the public domain as soon as it is published? Mistaken assumption. There were pirate editions before digital age: ask Oxford University Press or any academic press whose books got merrily pirated and sold at 1/4 of the price in some countries; ask authors old enough to remember being translated and published without authorization or royalties in USSR. Well, USSR relented in the end and did give royalties: in rubles, and it was forbidden to export them. So the writers would go to USSR and have a luxury holyday on their royalties, buy some furs (though for the better ones, you needed to pay in dollars). So yes, there are digital pirates. But if anything, making pirate editions on the scale that was practiced with paper editions in USSR and other countries is more difficult in the digital age, because if they get offered online
