There is obviously much background of which I am unaware, but I do wish
to ask some questions for future reference.
First, take Matthew Henry's or Calvin's commentaries. They are way out
of copyright to say the least. Now some publishers may add OCR text,
comments, footnotes, etc. These are copyrightable. Am I correct in
thinking that the original text itself could be safely made into a
module? Surely I am, for these modules are out there. Or am I missing
something?
Secondly, there are those who publish images of old works and
manuscripts. They claim copyright to the images in some cases. At the
same time, if one does not publish the image, but only the bare original
text, which is not copyrightable, that should be OK for a module. Am I
correct? I should note that I have seen many cases of republished old
works that have a copyright label, but it seems to me that they
copyright can only apply to the modern additions.
Thirdly, there are times when one may be correct, but if a supposed
copyright holder has money and power, they might sue, even if they know
they are wrong. They are just being bullies. And here in the US,
frivilous legal action can result in the plaintiff being forced to pay
the defendant's legal costs and more. But not everybody is willing to
risk that, especially in an international forum. Is that a concern for
the Sword Community? In other words, even if a module maker has a legal
right, it may not be worth the risk in the view of the Sword community.
Am I correct in my impression that this is a factor?
Any other clarifying info would help. Thanks.
Tom Sullivan
i...@beforgiven.info
FAX: 815-301-2835
---------------------
Great News!
God created you, owns you and gave you commands to obey.
You have disobeyed God - as your conscience very well attests to you.
God's holiness and justice compel Him to punish you in Hell.
Jesus Christ became Man, was crucified, buried and rose from the dead
as a substitute for all who trust in Him, redeeming them from Hell.
If you repent (turn from your sin) and believe (trust) in Jesus Christ,
you will go to Heaven. Otherwise you will go to Hell.
Warning! Good works are a result, not cause, of saving trust.
More info is at www.esig.beforgiven.info
Do you believe this? Copy this signature into your email program
and use the Internet to spread the Great News every time you email.
On 09/10/2018 09:35 AM, Peter Von Kaehne wrote:
This matter has been discussed ad nauseam on our mailing list several
years ago. Nothing has changed since.
All written works including translations are copyrighted until the
copyright expires.
We need a permission by the copyright owner or the copyrioght owner
licenses the text freely.
If we do not have a permission, nor is there a free license available,
we will not publish the module.
Nothing complicated there. There are edge cases (publication in Ethiopia
until recently or Iran until now being among them), this one is not one.
The translations are safely within all limits of copyright expiry for
the foreseeable future. So, if you want the module published, you need
to go and do the legwork. Speak with publishers and find agreement. Ask
them to write a letter to Troy or me that they agree with a module being
made of their text. Until then please cease debating the matter here and
please cease offering "test modules" on our list.
*Gesendet:* Montag, 10. September 2018 um 14:15 Uhr
*Von:* "Andrew T." <thules...@gmail.com>
*An:* "SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum" <sword-devel@crosswire.org>
*Betreff:* Re: [sword-devel] Dead Sea Scrolls copyright discussion
I welcome honest discussion about it, I thirst for honest discussion
about it, more than I thirst for censorship at least. I have looked
into the copyright status of the DSS. What you say is partially
correct. Each separate manuscript’s translations (as found in
Discoveries in Judean Desert (DJD) or other sources) is held separately
by DJD (or the other sources) according to the copyright expressed in
each of the publication volumes. This copyright has been upheld by the
Supreme Court of Israel.
If you want details, here's a listing on a scroll by scroll basis:
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/scrolls_deadsea/inventory/cave01.htm
For example, the Genesis scroll and the Isaiah scroll:
*1Q1 (1QGen) /1QGenesis/* ^*ß*
D. Barthélemy, /Discoveries in the Judaean Desert I/ (DJD I) (Oxford
1955), 49-50, pl. VIII.
*1QIs^/a/ /1QIsaiah^a /*^*ß*
M. Burrows (ed.) with the assistance of J. C. Trever and W. H. Brownlee,
/The Dead Sea Scrolls of St. Mark's Monastery/, vol. I, pls. I-LIV.
Now there are other translations of these scrolls, the above two are the
most common and most widely used. However, the textual content of the
scrolls themselves in Hebrew or paleo-Hebrew, being rote fact, is not
copyrightable.
https://www.newmediarights.org/business_models/artist/are_facts_copyrighted
Facts such as the “Boston Celtics lost to the Toronto Raptors with a
score of 118-105” cannot be copyrighted, in Europe, N.America, or
Russia. Chess games, and their movements cannot be copyrighted (there
are cases of copyright disputes over the publishing of chess games that
have established this). The writing on the scrolls is factual, not the
product of modern scholarship. So the text itself can be published, by
anyone, for any reason. This is the publishing of fact.
If there is to be discussion about copyright and the DSS the case of
publishing original language copies, There should be no concern. There
are publicly available copies of both manuscript images (can't use the
images themselves though, need to transcribe from the images) and there
are textual copies.
From Peter's perspective, the issues surrounding the publication of the
DSS in translation, because it involves copyright needs to sorted out in
a way acceptable to this community. I agree. I would suggest taking
exactly the same approach as Martin G. Abegg Jr., Peter Flint, Eugene
Ulrich in their book 'The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible: The Oldest Known Bible
Translated for the First Time into English". This book is a derivative
work, and Abegg, Flint and Ulrich credit the translators and copyright
holder's explicitly.
Therefore for this community's concern to be addressed, what's needed is
for Peter to understand on what basis Abegg, Flint, and Ulrich re-used
the copyrighted translations of others; what the constraints of
publishing derivative works are (possibly according to different
jurisdictions); and forge a way ahead, or not according to best
judgement and community discussion.
As for me, so long as there is transparency in these discussions,
respect, due consideration and no bullying, of course Ill live within
the standards of the community.
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 9:06 AM Andrew T. <thules...@gmail.com
<mailto:thules...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Please, be patient and civil in this discussion, appreciating that
copyright and biblical texts are both important and that controversy
abounds when discussing both. Everyone's perspective is welcomed here:
_______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing
list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to
unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
_______________________________________________
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
