Rod, Bear in mind that most "traditional" media publisher around the world operate under the assumed agreement that any contributor, guest or host, releases all copyright to the publisher, unless otherwise specified in advance. Thus I'm unsure you'd be allowed to "give away" copyright of your comments to anyone else, since your acting as the copyright owner of what you contributed to BBC may be in breach of your (assumed) agreement with them.
Deryck On 4 April 2011 10:49, Rod Ward <[email protected]> wrote: > Martin, > > > > The audio is only available on iplayer for 7 days & some BBC programmes are > only available in the UK, although being World Service that restriction may > not apply. > > According to http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p007dhp8 the programme on the > 30th is available for another 2 days. > > Presumably I could give away the copyright of my comments – but the > questions asked etc probably belong to the interviewer/BBC. > > > > Rod > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Martin Poulter > *Sent:* 04 April 2011 09:57 > > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Transcripts of interviews > > > > Thanks for the feedback, everyone. I will hold fire on posting full > > transcripts since the situation is uncertain, though the summary of > "Anglo-Canadian" law shared by Tom suggests that the person who fixes > the interview in a given medium owns the copyright in that medium, so > that would imply I own the copyright in the transcript. > > Suffice to say that Rod Ward gave a really excellent interview to BBC > World Service about academic contributions to Wikpedia, and there will > be a link to the audio, and perhaps some paraphrasing, in the > newsletter. > > On Sun, 3 Apr 2011, Thomas Dalton wrote: > > > On 3 April 2011 12:58, David Gerard <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 3 April 2011 12:54, Thomas Dalton <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> Short extracts from the transcript might qualify as fair dealing (aka > >>> fair use). Publishing the whole thing would almost certainly be a > >>> copyright violation. > >> > >> > >> I tend to assume the speaker owns their words. > >> > >> But this whole thread is surmise. Is there *case law*? > > > > I've found this discussion of Canadian law on the subject, written by > > a lawyer specialising in the subject: > > > > > http://www.entertainmentmedialawsignal.com/2011/02/articles/copyright/question-and-answer-who-owns-the-copyright-in-an-interview/ > > > > English and Welsh law isn't identical to Canadian law, by any means, > > but it does have a lot in common with it. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia UK mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org > > > > -- > Dr Martin L Poulter ICT Manager, The Economics Network > Based at the ILRT, University of Bristol: http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/ > > The full experience: http://infobomb.org/ > Wikipedia contributor: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MartinPoulter > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org > ------------------------------ > > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 10.0.1209 / Virus Database: 1500/3549 - Release Date: 04/04/11 > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org > >
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list [email protected] http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
