Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I understand that there is difference between downloading and
distributing, but this difference IMHO exists when the license is known
and the license itself make a difference (most licenses do). I don't
agree that by downloading and *using* files under an unknown license you
make "fair use" and it is ok
copyright law distinguishes between these two cases (downloading and
distributing). copying works is often only arguably illegal.
distributing a copy without a license to do so is clearly illegal.
for example, in order to view a web page, a local copy must be made.
few web pages explicitly license this copying. however, in most
jurisdictions this act would be covered by the fair use of the implied
license. this is very different from distributing the same page for
example by hosting a complete copy on your website.
There are IMHO 2 important differences:
1) We are downloading the file from maven central, that is not where the
copyright holder published it (or at least we don't know this and we are
trying to understand who is the copyright holder and what rights he
grants to us).
2) Downloading a webpage for browsing is much more clear as "fair use"
than automatically download metadata as part of an automated project. I
can browse google as fair use, but I'm not sure I can create
applications scraping google results without referencing google as part
of an automated software. In fact they provides API with a much more
limited license to do that. If I write a tool that query Amazon via AWS
I can only make 1 query per second as per their license. If I write a
tool that simply browse their website and do thousands of query per
seconds to do the same things I would do with their API I don't think
this would be taken as "fair use".
Stefano
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
