[sword-devel] DSS (Biblical Dead Sea Scrolls based upon DJD translations)

[Andrew Thule]

Jerry, what the Law actually says trumps what the copyright office says.

I quoted the law itself which outlines restrictions on Copyright for fair
use.  I also quoted the Law which justifies 'derivative works' even where
Copyright applies.

If copyright doesn't apply to certain types of work - you need to show that
the source material I've used is NOT THAT TYPE OF MATERIAL. (I'm not making
use of someone's novel.  I'm making use of their research.)

If derivative work is permitted - you need to show I've not met the
conditions of derivative work.

The source material I've used is both exempt (according to the law) and the
derivative work in accordance with the law even if it weren't exempt.

~A


On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 6:39 PM, jhphx <jhphx at cox.net> wrote:

>  On 11/8/2012 9:26 AM, Andrew wrote:
>
>
> The US definition of 'Fair Use':
> http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107
>
> § 107 . Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
>
> Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106a, the fair use of
> a copyrighted work, including such use by ... is not an infringement of
> copyright.
>
>
> It should be noted that the doctrine of fair use existed before this
> section of law was coded. This section does not define the doctrine but
> only gives guidance for applying the doctrine.
>
> If there was a section of law that said something like: "Notwithstanding
> the provisions concerning the guilt of killers, a deadly act of insanity
> involving shooting, stabbing, poisoning,  or strangling is not an act of
> guilt,"  it would NOT mean that any act of shooting, stabbing,
> poisoning,  or strangling was an insane act. It would not be defining
> insanity. Likewise, 107 is not defining fair use. Thinking it does is a
> common mistake.
>
> The fallowing quotes are from:
> The US Copyright Office
> Cir21
> Reproduction of Copyrighted Works
> by Educators and Librarians
> http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ21.pdf
>
> 'Although the courts have considered and ruled upon the
> fair use doctrine over and over again, no real definition of
> the concept has ever emerged. Indeed, since the doctrine is
> an equitable rule of reason, no generally applicable definition
> is possible, and each case raising the question must be
> decided on its own facts. On the other hand, the courts have
> evolved a set of criteria which, though in no case definitive
> or determinative, provide some gauge for balancing
> the equities. These criteria have been stated in various ways,
> but essentially they can all be reduced to the four standards
> which have been adopted in section 107:'
>
> 'For example,
> the reference to fair use “by reproduction in copies or
> phonorecords or by any other means” is mainly intended
> to make clear that the doctrine has as much application to
> photocopying and taping as to older forms of use; it is not
> intended to give these kinds of reproduction any special
> status under the fair use provision or to sanction any reproduction
> beyond the normal and reasonable limits of fair use.
> Similarly, the newly-added reference to “multiple copies for
> classroom use” is a recognition that, under the proper circumstances
> of fairness, the doctrine can be applied to reproductions
> of multiple copies for the members of a class.
> The Committee has amended the first of the criteria to
> be considered—“the purpose and character of the use”—
> to state explicitly that this factor includes a consideration
> of “whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for
> non-profit educational purposes.” This amendment is not
> intended to be interpreted as any sort of not-for-profit
> limitation on educational uses of copyrighted works. It is
> an express recognition that, as under the present law, the
> commercial or non-profit character of an activity, while
> not conclusive with respect to fair use, can and should be
> weighed along with other factors in fair use decisions.'
>
> If one understands that last sentence then one understands that non-profit
> and educational do not guarantee a fair use claim.
>
> Jerry
>
> _______________________________________________
> sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel at crosswire.org
> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.crosswire.org/pipermail/sword-devel/attachments/20121109/4da23266/attachment-0001.html>