Hi Ravi: Personally, I am all for Fair Dealing/Use activism but the problem has been with the folk on Commons, no? That they keep deleting stuff?
Thank you. Best, Gautam ________ http://social.prathambooks.org/ On 8 June 2011 14:51, Ravishankar <ravidre...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Sometime before, we used the word meanings from a technical glossary > provided by Tamil Virtual University for the Tamil Wiktionary project. Our > rational is that only the presentation can be copyrighted and not the word > or meaning. If the word or meaning itself is copyrighted, then there is no > point in providing that word itself. Two years later after this initiative, > we got the glossary donated to us formally. So, the copyright issue doesn't > arise any more. > > Most Governments and public institutions do mean to provide data for public > use though they are not aware of Wikipedia compatible license. We can try > contacting them and hope to get a favourable response. But, the legal and > bureaucratic hurdles need not stop us from delaying our initiatives for too > long. While I do understand the legal and philosophical significance of > proper license to publish things, sometimes we also need to be bold and use > things for larger good. Governments have many other jobs than suing us > everyday ! > > Ravi > > > > > On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Gautam John <gau...@prathambooks.org>wrote: > >> Vickram, in my opinion and that of a friend, asking for a voluntary >> license (18,19,30A) along with the fact that it is a transformative >> use is probably the best bet. If not, fair dealing but that does leave >> us open to a legal challenge. Aside from this, there is the issue that >> even if we did get a license, we then do not have the ability to >> re-license it out under a CC-BY-SA license as required by Wikipedia >> and that would also run afoul of the fair dealing clause. >> >> Thank you. >> >> Best, >> >> Gautam >> ________ >> http://social.prathambooks.org/ >> >> >> >> >> On 8 June 2011 05:17, Vickram Crishna <vvcris...@radiophony.com> wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 1:13 AM, Gautam John <gau...@prathambooks.org> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 8 June 2011 01:03, Vickram Crishna <vvcris...@radiophony.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> My reading is that the Census Authority is very much a part of >> >> government. A question that I have been thinking about is whether >> >> census data (in the raw form and not the presentation) is capable of >> >> being copyrighted. >> >> >> > >> > Aside from the supposition that the raw data is not in fact >> copyrightable in >> > the first place, which is probably true, even if never tested, the law >> > clearly provides for grant of permission for data to be represented in >> > another form, such as sound or visual forms. It seems clear that the >> > provisions of copyright (the sections are too tediously long and legally >> > worded to reproduce here) are precisely applicable only to the form in >> which >> > the information is presented by the author(s). Moreover, if the >> presentation >> > of census data as published by the CA is in fact taken to be a design >> form >> > as defined by the Design Act 1911 (but to be frank I haven't looked at >> what >> > that creature is), then the copyright ceases as soon as 50 copies are >> > circulated, which has obviously already happened if the data is online. >> > I believe that mapped data represents precisely such alternate forms, >> > especially if it is dynamically presented (but even if it is not). >> Making it >> > dynamic is of course a highly useful form, one that I do not believe the >> > census authority has yet conceived. The census authority cannot refuse >> > permission for such presentation. If they do not publish the information >> as >> > is planned by our colleagues, then their copyright effectively lapses in >> any >> > case, for which proof an advertisement saying that (ie that no mapped >> data >> > as has been proposed has been published) must be published in a popular >> > newspaper (in English newspaper, for English language mapping, >> vernacular >> > for vernacular mapping). Unfortunately, it says nothing (that I can >> find) >> > about a public announcement on the Net, so maybe this advertisement >> stuff in >> > newspapers is the only path. >> > It seems that one must apply in the prescribed form for licensing >> > permission, but also note that it is not possible to refuse permission >> for >> > such applications, if the end use is scientific research or educational, >> and >> > also for non-commercial purposes, provided the end use is in the form of >> a >> > translation. However, this permission is only automatic after 3 and 7 >> years >> > (subject to relevant conditions) from the date of first publication. >> Even >> > here, I put it that the date of first publication is the date when the >> first >> > Census was published, and not the current census. I think that would >> take it >> > back to the early 20th century, and perhaps that might also mean that >> the >> > government does not (heh, heh) in fact have the right to exclusive >> copyright >> > of census data (even for the 'upgraded' 60 year copyright). >> > The relevant clauses are: >> > 1. Specificity: Sec 14 >> > 2. Design: Sec 15(2) >> > 3. Government ownership: Sec 17(d) and (dd) >> > 4. Compulsory licensing: Sec 31 (note that the RoC may assign some >> copyright >> > fee payable to the government, but prima facie it is unlikely they will >> do >> > so in this case) >> > 5. Automatic permission for translations etc: Sec 32 (sec 5(b) >> specifically >> > provides for 'broadcasting') >> > 6. Automatic permission for technical stuff: Sec 32A >> > 7. Right to broadcast: Sec 37 (worth checking!) >> > 8. Automatic visual recording for teaching: Sec 39 >> > 9. Possible challenge to government copyright of census data: Sec 44 >> > (register of copyrights: quite possible that the census information has >> not >> > been registered under the Act, and if so makes it impossible for the >> > government to take action against any form of infringement - sec 50A >> > provides for publication of registrations in the Gazette) >> > 10. Fair use: Sec 52 a(i) etc >> > -- >> > Vickram >> > Fool On The Hill >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Wikimediaindia-l mailing list >> > Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l >> > >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list >> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimediaindia-l mailing list > Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l > >
_______________________________________________ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
