Ray Saintonge wrote:
David Gerard wrote:
On 23/10/06, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
When the $100 million dollars is spend in the
United States, we have
achieved something for the United States.. At this moment the amount of
traffic is slowly but surely moving away from the English language
domination in both our traffic and in in content. Given that there is a
lot available in English in the first place, I expect that we have a
better return on investment from what we do for other languages and
cultures.
The other cultures are underfunded relatively to the huge amounts of
money that are spend on English language content in the first place.
The reason for changing the laws first in the US is because they tend
to pressure the rest of the world into 'harmonising' with their
copyright laws.
I don't see that as necessarily the case. For a long time US copyright
law had renewals. Despite some completely understandable difficulties I
think this was a good idea in general. That is gone. The US also based
copyright terms on date of publication rather than the death date of the
author; that too was changed in 1976 to conform with international
rules. The US has not (yet) adopted database protection laws that could
result in keeping some material protected indefinitely even when it is
already in the public domain.
The EU has done a fine job of building laws to support bureaucracy, and
there is an unfortunate unwillingness on the part of EU members to adopt
legislative positions that would run contrary to the bureaucratizing
trends of the EU administrators. While it is important to keep US
legislation moving in the direction of openness, it is as illusory to
believe that this openness will trickle down to other countries as it is
to believe in trickle-down economics. Far more effort needs to be
directed at the EU, whose administration only magnifies the
amateurishness of our own AfD clique.
Too often when the issue of making information available to everybody
the brick wall is not in the US but in the EU. In many respects other
activities by the US in other unrelated matters have pointed to an
abandonment of moral leadership. The effect of that is toward a
disinclination on the part of other countries to follow the US lead,
even when it would be beneficial to do so. I don't see Europe doing
anything to accept leadership. I see one fat orange cat sitting in
Brussels ignoring its herd of Odies.
Unlike Gerard I don't think this should become a matter of the English
language versus other languages. If the issue is a question of laws
that has nothing to do with the language in which those laws are
written. If it has to do with the language of material to be put into
our databases, there are non-English materials in US depositories that
can as easily be put into the database. The fact nevertheless remains
that it takes people familiar with a language to make informed decisions
about what should be included. I understand the lack of support for OCR
in other scripts, notably those of Asia, but again don't expect people
whose everyday life is exclusively in a Roman script to have the ability
to develop that technical support.
Ec
Hoi,
Well as we are dreaming, creating support for the support of OCR for
scripts other than the Roman languages would be a good idea.. Remember
we are dreaming about spending 100.000.000 US. I am sure we will find
developers in countries where there are MANY scripts like Iran that will
be quite happy to help us with this. It is also not hard to find
developers to do a similar thing in Ghana or Nigeria.
Where Ray does not find a reason to spend money in non-Roman language
countries, I find many reasons; there is this obvious need and, you do
buy more developer time for your money. Given the huge amount of data
that is already available for the Roman language cultures, it would very
much open up cultures that are unknown to us. Not only that by being
genuinely interested in other cultures, the world will become more
diverse. It will also benefit the local cultures and it will prevent the
blindness that you get when people do not know their history. Then
again, there are many cultures that have a past that is almost unknown
because of political machinations allowing politicians to play their
game of divide and conquer.
Concluding, spend money on opening up historical documents of the
forgotten and often despised cultures. Spend money on what is considered
our enemies. This way we will not only learn to appreciate other
heritages than our own, we will learn that all human knowledge is our
heritage. I would suggest that that lesson alone is worth $
100.000.000.- It beats going to war in the productivity department.
Thanks,
GerardM