On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 7:28 AM, teun spaans <teun.spaans at gmail.com> wrote:
IANAL, but I suppose three things must be considered:
- US law, where the servers are based
- the country where a work originates
- the country to which the wikipedian belongs.
Thanks, but there is still a problem: If these laws are under conflict, like the local law allows fair-use to some material but the US law doesn't, what should we do. I can't decide whether it should be marked as a copyright violation per US law or just being accepted per local ones? Thanks.
Jimmy_xu_wrk@zhwiki 06/25/2009
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Jimmy Xuxu.jimmy.wrk@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 7:28 AM, teun spaans <teun.spaans at gmail.com> wrote:
IANAL, but I suppose three things must be considered:
- US law, where the servers are based
- the country where a work originates
- the country to which the wikipedian belongs.
Thanks, but there is still a problem: If these laws are under conflict, like the local law allows fair-use to some material but the US law doesn't, what should we do. I can't decide whether it should be marked as a copyright violation per US law or just being accepted per local ones? Thanks.
In case the laws are in conflict, you should only allow that which is allowed by the laws of all countries which laws you follow.
What are examples of something which is fair use under chinese law but not under US law? <goes to check the discussion>
In general you should not upload anything that violates US law. Additional standards are set by each community - in terms of free license v. fair use, whether an image is being used effectively on the project, &c.
SJ
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 5:49 AM, Jimmy Xuxu.jimmy.wrk@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 7:28 AM, teun spaans <teun.spaans at gmail.com> wrote:
IANAL, but I suppose three things must be considered:
- US law, where the servers are based
- the country where a work originates
- the country to which the wikipedian belongs.
Thanks, but there is still a problem: If these laws are under conflict, like the local law allows fair-use to some material but the US law doesn't, what should we do. I can't decide whether it should be marked as a copyright violation per US law or just being accepted per local ones? Thanks.
Jimmy_xu_wrk@zhwiki 06/25/2009
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
2009/6/25 Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com:
What are examples of something which is fair use under chinese law but not under US law? <goes to check the discussion>
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Copyright_Law_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_Ch...
I believe (10) is not very effectively protected in the US, but I could be wrong. (3) is quite a common provision, but (4) takes it further than usual.
(I really like the spirit of nr. 11, but I can see how it's not really applicable here...)
Yeah. We ARE discussing (4) at zhwiki, but it seems to be resolved per preceding reply. These laws are confusing, huh~ Thanks a lot.
Jimmy_xu_wrk@zhwiki 06/25/2009
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:51 PM, Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
2009/6/25 Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com:
What are examples of something which is fair use under chinese law but not under US law? <goes to check the discussion>
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Copyright_Law_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_Ch...
I believe (10) is not very effectively protected in the US, but I could be wrong. (3) is quite a common provision, but (4) takes it further than usual.
(I really like the spirit of nr. 11, but I can see how it's not really applicable here...)
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Jimmy Xu wrote:
Yeah. We ARE discussing (4) at zhwiki, but it seems to be resolved per preceding reply. These laws are confusing, huh~ Thanks a lot.
One point that's important to keep in mind is that copyright does not protect the information; it protects the way the information is presented. The merger principle would have the effect of negating copyright on the way an idea is expressed if that idea can be expressed in no other way. An interesting point about (4) is that it refers to "current issues"; how long does a piece of news remain current? The need for the author to have specifically forbidden re-use poses interesting problems. This is comparable to former US laws around registration and notice that the US had to repeal in order to come into line with treaty obligations.
Ec
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:51 PM, Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
2009/6/25 Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com:
What are examples of something which is fair use under chinese law but not under US law? <goes to check the discussion>
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Copyright_Law_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_Ch...
I believe (10) is not very effectively protected in the US, but I could be wrong. (3) is quite a common provision, but (4) takes it further than usual.
(I really like the spirit of nr. 11, but I can see how it's not really applicable here...)
So that is, due to P.R. of China Copyright Law, text that published in newspapers, periodicals, radio and TV stations and other media reported the news of the simple fact are not copyrighted. But I cannot find these exception in US Copyright Law. Maybe it's only because my English is not so good and I didn't caught it, maybe it's a possible conflict. And if so, can we use these text published in P.R. of China in Wikipedia as if they were in PD?
And, the image now has no problem at all, everything causes by the text.
Jimmy_xu_wrk@zhwiki 06/25/2009
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Samuel Kleinmeta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
What are examples of something which is fair use under chinese law but not under US law? <goes to check the discussion>
In general you should not upload anything that violates US law. Additional standards are set by each community - in terms of free license v. fair use, whether an image is being used effectively on the project, &c.
SJ
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 5:49 AM, Jimmy Xu<xu.jimmy.wrk at gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 7:28 AM, teun spaans <teun.spaans at gmail.com> wrote:
IANAL, but I suppose three things must be considered:
- US law, where the servers are based
- the country where a work originates
- the country to which the wikipedian belongs.
Thanks, but there is still a problem: If these laws are under conflict, like the local law allows fair-use to some material but the US law doesn't, what should we do. I can't decide whether it should be marked as a copyright violation per US law or just being accepted per
local ones? Thanks.
Jimmy_xu_wrk at zhwiki 06/25/2009
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
If PRC law says that factual statements published in PRC media cannot be copyrighted, then those statements may be available under a sort of PRC-PD license for anyone to use, including zh.wp -- it would not be a matter of fair use.
Under PRC law, are statements of simple fact *published outside of PRC* copyrighted? I believe you should not use text whose authors/publishers expect them to be copyrighted, unless it is also fair use within US law.
SJ
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 9:01 AM, Jimmy Xuxu.jimmy.wrk@gmail.com wrote:
So that is, due to P.R. of China Copyright Law, text that published in newspapers, periodicals, radio and TV stations and other media reported the news of the simple fact are not copyrighted. But I cannot find these exception in US Copyright Law. Maybe it's only because my English is not so good and I didn't caught it, maybe it's a possible conflict. And if so, can we use these text published in P.R. of China in Wikipedia as if they were in PD?
And, the image now has no problem at all, everything causes by the text.
Jimmy_xu_wrk@zhwiki 06/25/2009
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Samuel Kleinmeta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
What are examples of something which is fair use under chinese law but not under US law? <goes to check the discussion>
In general you should not upload anything that violates US law. Additional standards are set by each community - in terms of free license v. fair use, whether an image is being used effectively on the project, &c.
SJ
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 5:49 AM, Jimmy Xu<xu.jimmy.wrk at gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 7:28 AM, teun spaans <teun.spaans at gmail.com> wrote:
IANAL, but I suppose three things must be considered:
- US law, where the servers are based
- the country where a work originates
- the country to which the wikipedian belongs.
Thanks, but there is still a problem: If these laws are under conflict, like the local law allows fair-use to some material but the US law doesn't, what should we do. I can't decide whether it should be marked as a copyright violation per US law or just being accepted per
local ones? Thanks.
Jimmy_xu_wrk at zhwiki 06/25/2009
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 15:01, Jimmy Xuxu.jimmy.wrk@gmail.com wrote:
So that is, due to P.R. of China Copyright Law, text that published in newspapers, periodicals, radio and TV stations and other media reported the news of the simple fact are not copyrighted. But I cannot find these exception in US Copyright Law. Maybe it's only because my
If it is legal to use them by PRC laws (and the material was authored in PRC) then it is legal to use anywhere in the world. At least I'd believe so, because this is the same case as US governmental materials, soviet era stuff and like, but IANAL.
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 7:16 AM, Peter Gervaigrinapo@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 15:01, Jimmy Xuxu.jimmy.wrk@gmail.com wrote:
So that is, due to P.R. of China Copyright Law, text that published in newspapers, periodicals, radio and TV stations and other media reported the news of the simple fact are not copyrighted. But I cannot find these exception in US Copyright Law. Maybe it's only because my
If it is legal to use them by PRC laws (and the material was authored in PRC) then it is legal to use anywhere in the world. At least I'd believe so, because this is the same case as US governmental materials, soviet era stuff and like, but IANAL.
This is false. The laws of the US in particular are a little weird here. Under current law (and ignoring the complex historical cases), a work published by a foreign national in a foreign country which is a Berne convention partner is eligible for copyright protection in the US in all cases where the same work published in the US by a US national would be eligible for copyright protection.
There is no consideration in US law for whether the work happens to be public domain in the country of origin. The only considerations that matter (for works being published under present law) is whether the same work published in the US would be eligible for protection.
Many countries other than the US don't do things this way. In particular, most countries do not grant protection to works unless that protection already exists in the country of origin, but this is not the way US law works. So a US work that is public domain in the US tends to be considered public domain in most other countries, but the converse does not necessarily apply.
-Robert Rohde
And here is the issue that in Berne Convention Article 2 (8), it says "The protection of this Convention shall not apply to news of the day or to miscellaneous facts having the character of mere items of press information." So whether these kind of stuffs can be used as if they were in public domain? Or some other steps has to be taken.
Additionally, if so, that means for a news, the "five Ws" are not eligible but the comment by the author is eligible for copyright. Am I right? Thanks.
Jimmy_xu_wrk@zhwiki 06/26/2009
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 12:28 AM, Robert Rohde rarohde@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 7:16 AM, Peter Gervaigrinapo@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 15:01, Jimmy Xuxu.jimmy.wrk@gmail.com wrote:
So that is, due to P.R. of China Copyright Law, text that published in newspapers, periodicals, radio and TV stations and other media reported the news of the simple fact are not copyrighted. But I cannot find these exception in US Copyright Law. Maybe it's only because my
If it is legal to use them by PRC laws (and the material was authored in PRC) then it is legal to use anywhere in the world. At least I'd believe so, because this is the same case as US governmental materials, soviet era stuff and like, but IANAL.
This is false. The laws of the US in particular are a little weird here. Under current law (and ignoring the complex historical cases), a work published by a foreign national in a foreign country which is a Berne convention partner is eligible for copyright protection in the US in all cases where the same work published in the US by a US national would be eligible for copyright protection.
There is no consideration in US law for whether the work happens to be public domain in the country of origin. The only considerations that matter (for works being published under present law) is whether the same work published in the US would be eligible for protection.
Many countries other than the US don't do things this way. In particular, most countries do not grant protection to works unless that protection already exists in the country of origin, but this is not the way US law works. So a US work that is public domain in the US tends to be considered public domain in most other countries, but the converse does not necessarily apply.
-Robert Rohde
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
2009/6/25 Jimmy Xu xu.jimmy.wrk@gmail.com:
And here is the issue that in Berne Convention Article 2 (8), it says "The protection of this Convention shall not apply to news of the day or to miscellaneous facts having the character of mere items of press information." So whether these kind of stuffs can be used as if they were in public domain? Or some other steps has to be taken.
Here's my interpretation of this: there are two sides to copyright, the "concept" and the expression - the idea, and the way you write it.
If you've written a novel, you have both kinds of copyright. I can't tell the same story by changing all the words without infringing - the idea is still the same. If you're just writing about simple factual information, however, then you don't have copyright in the underlying facts - but you still have copyright in the way you write about them.
So, a newspaper can't claim copyright on the "concept" of one of its stories - I can't copyright the idea of writing stories about an election! - but the actual text of them is still copyrighted, so we can't simply reprint copies of it as though it were public domain.
Additionally, if so, that means for a news, the "five Ws" are not eligible but the comment by the author is eligible for copyright. Am I right? Thanks.
I'd extend "comment" to be "the words they've actually written", but that's about it. They can't stop you paraphrasing or rewriting it.
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 6:01 AM, Jimmy Xuxu.jimmy.wrk@gmail.com wrote:
So that is, due to P.R. of China Copyright Law, text that published in newspapers, periodicals, radio and TV stations and other media reported the news of the simple fact are not copyrighted. But I cannot find these exception in US Copyright Law. Maybe it's only because my English is not so good and I didn't caught it, maybe it's a possible conflict. And if so, can we use these text published in P.R. of China in Wikipedia as if they were in PD?
And, the image now has no problem at all, everything causes by the text.
Simple facts are not eligible for US copyright. Only creative expression is protected under US case law. One of the more important Supreme Court cases dealing with this is:
[[Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service]]
-Robert Rohde
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org