On 24 October 2011 11:49, Mark Goodge <[email protected]> wrote: > On 24/10/2011 12:33, Chris Taggart wrote: > >> >> No, but that's not the point I was making. I (possibly incorrectly) >> understood that Press Releases were deemed to have been put in the >> public domain by the entity issuing them. >> > > You have understood incorrectly, in that case :-) > > Issuing a press release doesn't put it in the public domain, or change its > copyright status. What it does do is create an implied licence to copy and > republish the content for all the normal purposes associated with a press > release. But such an implied licence can be explicitly overridden or > revoked. > Thanks for clarification.
> > A common real life example of that is embargoed press releases (ie, those > which are sent out with a restriction that the content cannot be published > prior to a certain date). If the recipient publishes the material early, > then they would be in breach of copyright as the licence to reproduce it is > conditional on the embargo being honoured. > > In absence of/post-expiry of embargo, do you think there are any other conditions to the implied licence? Chris -- ------------------------------------------------------- OpenCorporates :: The Open Database of the Corporate World http://opencorporates.com OpenlyLocal :: Making Local Government More Transparent http://openlylocal.com Blog: http://countculture.wordpress.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/CountCulture
_______________________________________________ developers-public mailing list [email protected] https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public Unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/options/developers-public/archive%40mail-archive.com
