[Foundation-l] An argument for strong copyleft

[geni]

On 08/04/2008, Nikola Smolenski <smolensk at eunet.yu> wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 April 2008 23:16:34 geni wrote:
>  > On 08/04/2008, Nikola Smolenski <smolensk at eunet.yu> wrote:
>  > > Yes, really. Perhaps I should clarify: fair use does not require that I
>  > >  release my work under the same conditions as the work I am fairly using;
>  >
>  > Actually it does. It requires that you release it under US law.
>
>
> I don't think so. And anyway, it doesn't matter: the moment I create it, my
>  work is released under nearly all copyright laws.

You sentence is internally contradictory.


>
>  > >  > >  > >  Second, I don't want to release my work under CC-BY because I
>  > >  > >  > > do want enhancements to my work to be freely reusable.
>  > >  > >  >
>  > >  > >  > A newspaper article includeing your work may well be an
>  > >  > >  > enhancement.
>  > >  > >
>  > >  > > Actually, it would rather be the other way around (unless the
>  > >  > > article is about my work).
>  > >  >
>  > >  > Define "about your work".
>  > >
>  > > I believe it is obvious to everyone.
>  >
>  > Define it or withdraw it.
>
>
> Your replies are getting more senseless as time passes. I don't need to define
>  it, and I won't withdraw it. I don't see why is it relevant or important
>  anyway.

Because it is a key part of when you think a work should be treated as
a derivative.


>
>  > >  > >  > Okey so you think newspaper articles would be overkill. So what
>  > >  > >  > if all someone does is add a caption? What if  your work is used
>  > >  > >  > as part of a Collage? What if it is used as part of a flow chart?
>  > >  > >  > Where do you draw the line?
>  > >  > >
>  > >  > > I do not draw the line.
>  > >  >
>  > >  > Then you cannot object to where other draw it.
>  > >
>  > > Yes I can. I just did.
>  >
>  > Yes but your objections have no value.
>
>
> Yes they do. Especially as you are drawing the line completely outside of the
>  grey area.

Your grey area maybe.

>
>  > >  > >I am aware that there are use cases that are
>  > >  > >  inbetween. Yet most of the cases fall in two clearly separate
>  > >  > > categories: one for which I do want the enhancement to my work to be
>  > >  > > freely reusable, and one for which I am content with my work
>  > >  > > illustrating an unrelated work.
>  > >  >
>  > >  > Meaningless since you will not define which is which.
>  > >
>  > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_fallacy
>  >
>  > Okey I acknowledge there are grey areas. I deal with grey areas all
>  > the time. However I gave you a list of partical real world examples.
>  > If you are unable to sort them then your position is useless.
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_(logic)

Argument by wikilink?

Okey then lets go through this one more time

Is a caption an enhancement to your work?
Is being made part of a collage an enhancement to your work?
Is being made part of a flow chart an enhancement to your work?
Is a title an enhancement to your work?
Is a histogram an an enhancement to your work?


>
>  > >  > In any case the requirement to release a work under a free license is
>  > >  > pretty minor compared to the requirement to include a full copy of the
>  > >  > license and an interesting set of disclaimers.
>  > >
>  > > No, in most cases it is a much more restrictive requirement.
>  >
>  > You cannot at this time realistically include a GFDL image in the new
>  > scientist. You can include a copyleft article in the new scientist.
>
>
> These two examples have nothing in common. Requirement to print the license
>  with the work is easily fulfilled in a number of cases, if not in the New
>  Scientist. Requirement to change the license of the work is something most
>  people will not accept.

The new scientist did and Reed Elsevier have a turnover of over 4
billion. So I would appear that even very large media groups can live
with strong viral requirements.

So who can't?

Goverments? Well the US gov manages PD, Israel may be going to (I need
a translation of the relevant act). Indonesia may do. Crown copyright
is fairly free although not entirely. Governments can probably cope
with copyleft.

Okey book publishers Well various copyleft books have been published
and Bill Graham Archives v. Dorling Kindersley suggests that they have
a fair degree of latitude for fair use of images.

Small publishers. You really think school newspapers and society
magazines care if they have to release stuff under free license?


Including the license is not suitable for:

Newspapers
Magazines
Journals
Comics
Posters
Leaflets
Basicaly any form of sound recording
Sculpture
Pottery
Postcards
Fliers
Birthday/christmas cards

-- 
geni