Hi
I have send a mail to them; as always no reply from them.
Posted the same request on the wall of Census2011
If you have fb account try to convey the same message on facebook wall;
then they will notice and respond back if we are lucky.
It has worked for few sites .
till then let us use this pdf as the base.
Thanks,
Naveen Francis
On 8 June 2011 14:54, Gautam John <gautam(a)prathambooks.org> wrote:
Hi Ravi:
Personally, I am all for Fair Dealing/Use activism but the problem has
been with the folk on Commons, no? That they keep deleting stuff?
Thank you.
Best,
Gautam
________
http://social.prathambooks.org/
On 8 June 2011 14:51, Ravishankar <ravidreams(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sometime before, we used the word meanings from a technical glossary
> provided by Tamil Virtual University for the Tamil Wiktionary project. Our
> rational is that only the presentation can be copyrighted and not the word
> or meaning. If the word or meaning itself is copyrighted, then there is no
> point in providing that word itself. Two years later after this initiative,
> we got the glossary donated to us formally. So, the copyright issue doesn't
> arise any more.
>
> Most Governments and public institutions do mean to provide data for
> public use though they are not aware of Wikipedia compatible license. We can
> try contacting them and hope to get a favourable response. But, the legal
> and bureaucratic hurdles need not stop us from delaying our initiatives for
> too long. While I do understand the legal and philosophical significance of
> proper license to publish things, sometimes we also need to be bold and use
> things for larger good. Governments have many other jobs than suing us
> everyday !
>
> Ravi
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Gautam John <gautam(a)prathambooks.org>wrote;wrote:
>
>> Vickram, in my opinion and that of a friend, asking for a voluntary
>> license (18,19,30A) along with the fact that it is a transformative
>> use is probably the best bet. If not, fair dealing but that does leave
>> us open to a legal challenge. Aside from this, there is the issue that
>> even if we did get a license, we then do not have the ability to
>> re-license it out under a CC-BY-SA license as required by Wikipedia
>> and that would also run afoul of the fair dealing clause.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Gautam
>> ________
>>
http://social.prathambooks.org/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 8 June 2011 05:17, Vickram Crishna <vvcrishna(a)radiophony.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 1:13 AM, Gautam John <
>> gautam(a)prathambooks.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 8 June 2011 01:03, Vickram Crishna <vvcrishna(a)radiophony.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> My reading is that the Census Authority is very much a part of
>> >> government. A question that I have been thinking about is whether
>> >> census data (in the raw form and not the presentation) is capable
>> of
>> >> being copyrighted.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Aside from the supposition that the raw data is not in fact
>> copyrightable in
>> > the first place, which is probably true, even if never tested, the
>> law
>> > clearly provides for grant of permission for data to be represented
>> in
>> > another form, such as sound or visual forms. It seems clear that the
>> > provisions of copyright (the sections are too tediously long and
>> legally
>> > worded to reproduce here) are precisely applicable only to the form
>> in which
>> > the information is presented by the author(s). Moreover, if the
>> presentation
>> > of census data as published by the CA is in fact taken to be a
>> design form
>> > as defined by the Design Act 1911 (but to be frank I haven't looked
>> at what
>> > that creature is), then the copyright ceases as soon as 50 copies
>> are
>> > circulated, which has obviously already happened if the data is
>> online.
>> > I believe that mapped data represents precisely such alternate
>> forms,
>> > especially if it is dynamically presented (but even if it is not).
>> Making it
>> > dynamic is of course a highly useful form, one that I do not believe
>> the
>> > census authority has yet conceived. The census authority cannot
>> refuse
>> > permission for such presentation. If they do not publish the
>> information as
>> > is planned by our colleagues, then their copyright effectively
>> lapses in any
>> > case, for which proof an advertisement saying that (ie that no
>> mapped data
>> > as has been proposed has been published) must be published in a
>> popular
>> > newspaper (in English newspaper, for English language mapping,
>> vernacular
>> > for vernacular mapping). Unfortunately, it says nothing (that I can
>> find)
>> > about a public announcement on the Net, so maybe this advertisement
>> stuff in
>> > newspapers is the only path.
>> > It seems that one must apply in the prescribed form for licensing
>> > permission, but also note that it is not possible to refuse
>> permission for
>> > such applications, if the end use is scientific research or
>> educational, and
>> > also for non-commercial purposes, provided the end use is in the
>> form of a
>> > translation. However, this permission is only automatic after 3 and
>> 7 years
>> > (subject to relevant conditions) from the date of first publication.
>> Even
>> > here, I put it that the date of first publication is the date when
>> the first
>> > Census was published, and not the current census. I think that would
>> take it
>> > back to the early 20th century, and perhaps that might also mean
>> that the
>> > government does not (heh, heh) in fact have the right to exclusive
>> copyright
>> > of census data (even for the 'upgraded' 60 year copyright).
>> > The relevant clauses are:
>> > 1. Specificity: Sec 14
>> > 2. Design: Sec 15(2)
>> > 3. Government ownership: Sec 17(d) and (dd)
>> > 4. Compulsory licensing: Sec 31 (note that the RoC may assign some
>> copyright
>> > fee payable to the government, but prima facie it is unlikely they
>> will do
>> > so in this case)
>> > 5. Automatic permission for translations etc: Sec 32 (sec 5(b)
>> specifically
>> > provides for 'broadcasting')
>> > 6. Automatic permission for technical stuff: Sec 32A
>> > 7. Right to broadcast: Sec 37 (worth checking!)
>> > 8. Automatic visual recording for teaching: Sec 39
>> > 9. Possible challenge to government copyright of census data: Sec 44
>> > (register of copyrights: quite possible that the census information
>> has not
>> > been registered under the Act, and if so makes it impossible for the
>> > government to take action against any form of infringement - sec 50A
>> > provides for publication of registrations in the Gazette)
>> > 10. Fair use: Sec 52 a(i) etc
>> > --
>> > Vickram
>> > Fool On The Hill
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
>> > Wikimediaindia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> >
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
>> >
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
>> Wikimediaindia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
> Wikimediaindia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
_______________________________________________
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org