On 22 Feb 2010, at 04:26, Graham Percival wrote:
see the german wikipedia
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/LilyPond
too bad it's under dispute.
Is it? I don't see such a remark. It is only stated that the
picture
shows copyrighted material which can only be cited legally as a very
small snippet.
I can't read German, or speak about German copyright law. And for
that matter, I'm not a trained lawyer in Canadian law (or anywhere
else). This email does not constitute legal advice.
That said, I can't see how using that exerpt could possibly
qualify under Canada's "fair dealing" provisions in the copyright
act. Distributing that de.wikipedia.org page in Canada would thus
constitute an infringement of copyright.
Since it is a small snippet, not affecting the commercial value of the
original work, it should be acceptable also under Canada's "fair
dealing" interpretation by its Suporeme Court:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_dealing#Canada
In answer to any question about using such examples in the
LilyPond documentation (Jan and Werner haven't raised the issue,
but I'm certain that many readers will be wondering about this),
my position has not changed: The official LilyPond documentation
should not include any material which infringes on copyright in
any country.
Formally, you only have to comply with the local copyright law.
In addition to distributing the webpages ourselves,
a number of people redistribute the lilypond docs; I don't think
we should try getting Debian in trouble by including any
copyright-infringing material.
It is really up to them to learn about their local copyright law and
make sure they comply. If they distribute it from the US:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
You may not want to use such examples, though for other reasons.
Hans
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
