On 04/03/2008, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 04/03/2008, Andrew Gray <shimgray(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
What you actually have is silence as a result of
people breaking their
backs to intercept and deal with a fairly regular stream of legal
demands (of varying levels of frivolousness) on a case-by-case basis.
This quite often involves deleting stuff and going "sorry!"
Do you have any statistics for copyright queries to OTRS?
Beyond "you see no shortage", not really. (Usual disclaimer: I haven't
done much OTRS work in the past six months, but I don't see it
changing!).
It's hard to be very clear - copyright is often entangled with another
kind of complaint, occasionally an attempt at being a lever for
something else. It's often invoked when it really shouldn't be ("this
picture is of something associated with me..."), and it can vary
massively in degree from "you're using my photo and I'm okay with that
but please get my name right" to "you have ripped off the content of
my entire website". There's the odd privacy one, too, which tends to
get caught up with it - "you have photographed me and I'm upset".
It's usually *not* objecting to routine fair-use claims (eg album
covers) - it's more often things like debatable claims of public
domain status (photographs of artwork are perennial) which could go
either way.
A large chunk of it is easily fob-offable, but there's a nontrivial
amount of things that have to be quietly removed. I don't know what
proportion of those have been mistakenly claimed as "fair use" at some
point in their lifespan.
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk