[Foundation-l] Good example; The works of Charles Darwin freed :)

[Birgitte SB]

The article does mention other language editons
(Danish, Russian).  So I just want to point out that
he very well may own the copyright on the
translations.  Most all websites do a poor job of
distingiushing the different copyrights of the variety
of material they host.  It is quite common for people
simply write the terms of use to cover the most
restrictive copyright material on the site.  I have
only seen *one* website that mentions the issue of
underlying PD material on their Terms of Use, despite
the fact that many websites contain these kinds of
material.  He may well think it is quite obvious that
anyone can take the PD material and do as they like. 
On the other hand he may not.  But lets not jump to
conclusions here.


Birgitte SB

--- geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 10/19/06, James Hare <messedrocker at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > He's doing the next worst thing: taking a public
> domain revolutionary
> > publication and owning it. It's not even his.
> 
> Under current english and welsh case law (which as
> far as I know
> hasn't inbvolved an actual case in over 100 years)
> the copy is his. If
> you can get hold of the originals you would under
> english and welsh
> law be free to do what you like with them. However
> this is a copy and
> he owns the copy (I'll probably contact him in a few
> days to find out
> what his reasoning is but I will assume he is a bit
> busy right now).
> 
> Incerdental current US case law has come to the
> oposite conclusion.
> 
> 
> -- 
> geni
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com