[WikiEN-l] Uploading images should be a privilige, not a right

[Ray Saintonge]

Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:

>Ray Saintonge wrote:
>  
>
>>Mark Wagner wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>On 7/21/06, Anthony <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Wait a second, are we talking about copyright infringement,
>>>>plagiarism, or legal use of non-free content?  These are three
>>>>separate problems.  I thought the original post was talking about
>>>>copyright infringement, but this new post talks about "taking somebody
>>>>else's writing and passing it off as their own".
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Most people don't distinguish between "plagiarism" and "copyright
>>>infringement" when it comes to writing: the school system is very
>>>effective at training people that simply copying the contents of the
>>>Encyclopedia Britannica isn't an acceptable way of writing a report,
>>>which is why we don't get very many instances of copyright violations
>>>with text.
>>>      
>>>
>>Using the work of a PD author without credit would still be plagiarism, 
>>but not copyvio.
>>    
>>
>As I understand it, under French (and possibly also German) law a
>content creator has "moral rights" (ie. right to attribution) even after
>copyright expires, which are (somehow) part of the copyright law.
>
Yes, there's even a loosely worded section about this in the US 
copyright law.  Neverthelesss, the actual term "copyright" is defined 
separately.  The confusion is understandable, but complying with the 
moral rights should be a lot easier.  It's good scholarship even for 
those works which have no protection at all.

Ec